Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'jingles'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Forum
    • English Speaking Forum
    • Deutschsprachige Community
    • Polska Społeczność
    • Česká a slovenská komunita
    • Communauté francophone
    • Comunità Italiana
    • Comunidad de habla española
    • Türkçe Topluluk
  • Mod Section
    • Rules, Announcements and General Discussion (English)
    • Modding Tutorials, Guides and Tools (English)
    • Interface Mods
    • Visual Mods
    • Sound Mods
    • Modpacks
    • Other Mods and Programs
    • Archive
  • Historical Section

Calendars

  • Community Calendar
  • This Day in History

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


AIM


MSN


Website URL


ICQ


Yahoo


Jabber


Skype


Twitter


Location


Interests

Found 12 results

  1. Constructive simple discussion and checklist of the issues wg must / should consider now prioritise to fix, for the good survivability and sustainablility of the game and the good of the playerbase community. Imho following are obvious to consider: i cv re-rework upheaval, ..... i.i Bring back some skill and tactics or go on dumbing down to arcadey pac-man gamestyle. ii balance (ship and now plane classes, ammo types and characteristics eg ifhe, etc.) iii loss of players and lack of new recruits or decline of playerbase population iv ntc aka rb v dockyard vi regional segregation, and separation, bizarre for a modern worldwide MMO. Inability to play with global friends anytime anywhere, unlike most any other game. vii no global server option (nor single global account, as advertised and promised, like any other MMO , eg on steam). viii continually excluding continents, eg especially Africa ix submarines x simplifying so many in game currencies or 'tokens' xi matchmaking ..(?) xii UI improvements and QoL improvements, eg friends list xiii more maps xiv) more modes (?) xv) operations xvi) make great events like hunt for Bismarck, or the Dunkirk campaign permanent, and available to new players xvii) better tutorials xviii) ranked mode(s) xix) clans & clan wars xx) power creep, op / new premiums, modernise tired out dated lines. Please add to the checklist or constructive positive suggestions and comments to encourage improvements and change.
  2. Jethro_Grey

    Jingles Mission

    So, i started a new account on NA a couple of months back. The daily grind on EU however, made it somewhat impossible to put real effort in. But, with the release of Jingles, i decided i want him on my NA account too. The issue is, i haven't progressed as far yet, so i don't see missions which are roughly 50-60 games away, and since i completed the mission on EU already, i don't know how long this mission is available. When does this mission run out? Another thing is, can i still complete it despite not being visible? I'm asking because WG rewarded me for not playing on NA by giving me a mission for a bunch of Halloween camos, and appearantly, i completed it yesterday. So, does this apply to all missions (Jingles, Blyska) or was it a one time thing for returning players? Also, is the Jingles mission treated differently because i had to opt-in via portal? @MrConway @Crysantos
  3. MacArthur92

    Jingles commander

    I have a question - does anybody know when Jingles commander will be available and how to obtain him?
  4. AzztheCruel

    Jingles for captain

    no issue, but was just wondering if your community contributor "themightyjingles" could get a captain in the game regardless of the "the ring" competition due to his current internet situation not allowing him to participate and the fact that, he has probably got the largest community in-game and the fact your scoring system really is counter intuitive. I feel his captain will sell very well. i for one will not buy the winner of the completion as i don't really watch their content. i hope this finds the relevant person within your company and thank you for listening
  5. majogl

    WTF advertising fail

    So I noticed a new jingles WOWS video, while on my phone. As I am not at home I decided to watch it on my phone. Unfortunately I don't have adblock on my phone, so I had to sit through an ad, but OH what an ad... The ad directly endorsed players to pay to hand over their wows accounts so that a team of "pros" can grind out T10 ships for them. For a "small fee" of course. What infuriates me is that youtube not only allows these ads, concerning WG products, but which are directly against WG's terms of use and EULA and then if that was not enough, they go and stick them onto videos of respected youtubers, potentially damaging their reputation. So I would like to know what WG will do against this, and when will their legal team get on it. Thank you. P.S.: Managed to find it (*edit). The ad is from a site *edit, hillarious I know. They have both russian and english versions.
  6. Procrastes

    The "Atlantic Fleet" game - good or bad?

    Atlantic Fleet - turn-based tactical naval warfare game. Some of you may already be familiar with the computer game Atlantic Fleet. It is a turn-based game of tactical naval warfare, set in World War 2, and it's available on Steam. Jingles just released a video on Youtube, in which he plays out the scenario where the British aircraft carrier Glorious, together with two escorting destroyers, were attacked by the German battleships Scharnhorst and Gneisenau. In real life, all the British vessels were sunk, while the Germans suffered only light damage to the Scharnhorst. Jingles sets out to try and change history, which he neatly accomplishes by sinking the Scharnhorst and leaving the Gneisenau heavily damaged and taking on water, without suffering any loss of ships himself. I am not really surprised by the outcome. I bought "Atlantic Fleet" some months ago and played a few scenarios. I also started off the campaign, from the German side. I played out the scenario of the battle of the River Plate, sinking all the British ships while suffering only light damage to the Graf Spee. Then I tried the campaign mode for a few hours, collected enough renown (which represents the in-game currency with which to purchase more ships) to get me the light cruiser Leipzig, used her to totally wipe out a British convoy with a couple of escorting destroyers, and then got her sunk by a torpedo from British submarine as the opening action in round one in the next battle. I haven't played it since. My take on the game, so far, is that while I like the simplicity of the game design, torpedoes - and submarines especially - seem to be a bit too effective. So much so, in fact, as to probably be game-breakingly overpowered. Added to this is the all too common drawback of single player games, that the AI seems to be cripplingly bad at making viable tactical decisions. WW2 naval artillery fire is rather neatly simulated, with it's inherent inaccuracy well represented. Salvoes land in the same turn they're fired, with accuracy that stats off bad but improves the more turns you keep firing at the same target. Torpedoes however, function so that you must try to predict where the target will be in one, two or more rounds, and then fire your torpedoes at that point. If the target ship changes course or speed, the torpedoes are likely to miss. You can avoid this completely, however, by simply moving up so close that the torpedoes will reach the target in the same turn they are fired. If you do this, the torpedoes will hit automatically. Since torpedoes do ma huge amount of damage, as well as cause flooding, you can pretty much insta-kill any target with this tactic. A destroyer might have some problems closing to insta-kill distance, especially if the target ship actually performs evasive manoeuvres and tries to defend itself. In the scenario played out by Jingles, both German battleships accommodated him nicely by sailing on obliviously in more or less straight lines, firing exclusively at the Glorious and refusing to react to the oncoming destroyers until the Scharnhorst was sunk. I think we might have to admit to the possibility that the German commanders may have performed somewhat differently in the actual battle, some 77 years ago. Submarines, however, will typically not have any problems closing to insta-kill distance with a surface ship, unless that ship is sailing away from the submarine. A U-boat ambush is, consequently, a very efficient tactic in Atlantic Fleet. And while destroyers do have various weapons against submarines, they have to get really close to use them - and they are no more immune to automatically hitting torpedoes than other ships in the game. Less so, in fact, since they usually sink from a single torpedo hit. Add to this, the fact that you can purchase a huge number of submarines for the same amount of renown that will get you a single cruiser, let alone a battleship. If I play this game again, I will try out the tactic of simply purchasing shitloads of submarines, and keep throwing them at the enemy ships until these are all sunk, or I run out of submarines. (I leave it to the history buffs to comment on whether this tactic actually corresponds to strategic thinking within the Kriegsmarine during WW2.) Jingles heaps praise on Atlantic Fleet, saying - if I recall correctly - that he "can't recommend it enough". I am, as would by now be apparent, somewhat less enthusiastic. It should be noted, however, that I haven't played the game for several months. It has updated once or twice since then, and crucial game mechanics may very well have improved considerably. Or not. I am a little bemused by Jingles review, and so I thought to make a post about it on the forum, and see what people may have to say about all this. I shall try to attach the Jingles' video below.
  7. Please enjoy the latest production from Fungeon Runs. It took quite a few hours of filming, editing, voice recording, and trial and error so we hope it's worth it. Any feedback is welcome Enjoy:
  8. Playing for fun About a week ago, Jingles released a World of Warships youtube-video titled ”Playing for fun” (see below). In it, he replayed and commented on a battle on the ‘Two Brothers’ map, which started with a bunch of ships – one destroyer, one cruiser and two battleships – immediately going down the middle channel and meeting a sticky end, leaving the rest of the team to pick up the fight with a decided numerical disadvantage. Jingles takes the replay as a basis for posing some questions of a philosophical nature, concerning the meaning and morality of a recurring phrase in the gaming world, namely “playing for fun”. What does “playing for fun” mean to different kinds of players? Is there a difference between playing for fun and playing to win? If so, is there some kind of moral imperative involved? Does anyone have the right to tell others how to play the game? I find those questions to be rather interesting, and so I have posted this thread to encourage further debate. Here are some of my own thoughts on the matter. I’ll start by declaring that I, personally, play the game only for fun. I do not compete either against myself (by trying to better my stats, for instance) or against other players. This does not mean that I don’t try to get better at the game, or that I don’t try to win my battles – I most assuredly do! But it does mean, among other things, that I do not care a whit about such statistics as win rate, nor do I bother about those in-game missions or objectives that I feel would get in the way of my fun; such as for example getting a certain number of kills within a set amount of time. (There have been a number of posts in various threads outlining why those kinds of missions can affect gameplay in a bad way.) When it comes to tactical choices in the gameplay during a given battle – which is, after all, what Jingles’ video is all about – my idea of playing for fun needs to be elaborated a little more. It should be said, firstly, that I like to win! Who doesn’t? And in a game like World of Warships, not trying to win a battle goes against the basic idea of the game as well as having the potential of ruining the game experience for the other players, allies and enemies alike. Consider playing a game of chess or Risk against an opponent that doesn’t have his or her heart in the game - how boring wouldn’t that be? But winning is always less important to me than having a good time. It’s easy to see that those things do not necessarily coincide. For instance, I wouldn’t dream of issuing demands to allied players and tell them what they should or should not do, even in a situation where I could clearly see that a given maneuver would improve the chances for a win. (A polite suggestion in the battle chat is another thing entirely; I think we all know the difference here.) I reserve the right to try and win the battle in whatever way I feel is best, just as I will always give the other players the same privilege. If someone tries something that doesn’t work out and it results in a loss, then that’s no big deal at all – there’s always the next time. Just press the ‘battle’ button and try again! And that brings me to my own take on the situation in the Jingles-video from ‘Two Brothers’. I have no problem at all with a couple of team members deciding to try and do something unusual and tactically questionable, just as long as it is done in good faith – by which I mean that it’s not done for the explicit purpose of losing the battle or otherwise sabotaging the game experience for the other players. One reason why I usually find the gameplay to be more enjoyable on the lower-to-middle tiers, is that battles on the top tiers can have a tendency to be rather predictable – everyone involved knows the best kind of maneuvers, and the battles unfold accordingly. Gameplay on the lower tiers is typically far less predictable (which admittedly has its drawbacks as well as its advantages). To sum it all up I play for fun, in order to have a good time either on my own or in a division with my friends. While winning is certainly a good thing in itself, the best games are the entertaining ones, especially those where the battle chat is used for constructive communication and friendly banter rather than complaining or abuse. War in real life is about conflict, where winning is by definition the ultimate goal. World of Warships is a game, and as such it is – for me at least – all about having fun in the company of fellow gamers.
  9. Fiery_Kathy

    Feedback to Jingles' 500K sub contest

    DISCLAIMER: Every single one of the video's jingles selected as winners deserve it for 100% DISCLAIMER 2: I don't really know in what part of the forum this should be in since I was doubting between this, video and streams and contests. I liked to participate in this contest and it really was a very nice initiative and it got me started in editting my videos. BUT, it's a shame that you made a 2nd playlist (the shortlist), my video was on the playlist for 1 day before you made your 2nd playlist. On that one day my video got approximately 100 views and 5 subs (which is very nice) The day after the 2nd playlist was introduced, I didn't get 1 single view, not 1 (which is very sad) I know it was propably a lot easier for you to make one to at least know out of which people you have to chose the final winners, but in my opinion making that 2nd playlist PUBLIC was a big mistake. No-one will even take a look at the first one because that's where the unfiltered "trash" is, it didn't help either that you never mentionned the first playlist after its first debut on your social media (facebook) Instead you were already promoting the shortlist, you had to scroll down to the 8th OF JULY to find the original playlist. This thread might look salty, that's because it kinda is, because I think it is unfair, both for me AND for the other people who didn't get selected. (As I said in the disclaimer, all people who did get selected really do deserve it tho) The point was to promote new youtubers (At least that's what I thought it was), but you kindoff sank (haha ship pun) your own idea with the introduction of the 2nd playlist AKA the shortlist. To anyone who is still reading this, thanks for reading. (I'm terrible in writing an ending to an opinion thingy) I hope maybe an other youtuber with the same idea as Jingles had might keep this feedback in mind) Sorry for eventual bad English. Have a nice day.
  10. For those of you who watched Why You Heff To Be Mad 3, here's that Atlanta game, with all the bits old Uncle Jingles didn't show you. Vile Hi-Ex, dirty ballistic trajectories, filthy double teaming and a shock double detonation. It's the A-rated game that was too legit for Jingles!
  11. Please see extracts from the emails I send World of Tanks earlier World of Warship Cruise Holidays Themed World of Warship Cruises - World of tanks/Battlefield Tours I saw this article on Whatever floats your boat - the unstoppable growth of themed cruises http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-35924022?SThisFB I expect it would have to be a river cruise to get good internet connection so people could play on line. It could be done at sea but internet is very poor, unless you put your own server on ship and that is what everyone played on. Rather like the battlefield tour holidays which is big business, see google search https://www.google.co.uk/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&rlz=1C1TEUA_enGB516GB516&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=battlefield%20tours Having a guest speaker talk about the battlefield while sailing to the next site. Having internet celebrity like `Rear Admiralty Jingles` speaking may help sales. I called it Themed World of Warship cruise just because it had a better ring to the name. This may well appeal to many of World of Warship/Tanks etc who enjoy travel and history. Kind Regards kenb
  12. So da zahlt sich heute mein Jahrelanges Abo von Jingles Kanal entlich aus. In dem Part des Interviews werden nur zwei Fragen beantwortet aber beide sind äußerst Interessant. Zum einen geht es um WG's Geldpolitik oder eher was WG tun muss/te um eine erfolgreiches Unternehmen zu werden. Im zweiten Teil geht es um "toxic behaviour" oder auch flame im Chat. Interessant dabei ist das diese Aussagen nicht all zu alt sind, jedoch noch vor der Entscheidung die T7 und 8 Premiums aus WoWs zu nehmen getroffen wurden. Ich vermute da ja einen starken zusammenhang und würde mich auch freuen wenn WG auf diesem Kurs bleibt. Was haltet ihr denn davon?
×