Too busy to cry, too busy to claim CQ being SOO OP~

[Jean_Bart79]

What I can see is,

 

Those who never own, or play conquerer are the ones who cry the most!

 

Based on recent disputed Flamu's video, all the fanboiz are having some fest in youtube comments and here in the forum.

 

They are basically so religious people, because they don't give a damn on the hidden fact that flamu in the video was in a complete optimal situation where CQ could utilise its ALL potential ability.

 

What flamu says = fact <-get a grip and HAVE YOUR OWN OPINION PLEASE.

 

So today, I want to tell this fact to those sad crying babies from actual CQ player's perception.

 

Yes, it needs some nerf, for example, 

 

1 lower the firechance by 5~10% 

2 lower the maximum HE dmg by 1K

 

I think these two are the most favourable and reasonable amendment on the current CQ,

 

If you wanna get this ship nerfed on its concealment, there are tons of things to be considered additionally. So I don't think WG will choose this as one of their considerable options.

 

But what I really want to say is "CQ is strong overall, and OP in some situations (other BBs are same.. become OP in SOME SITUATION as well). It may need some nerf on HE but not significantly because it is not as OP as you are thinking"

 

[ghostbuster_]

55 minutes ago, P0CAH0NTAS said:

What I can see is,

 

Those who never own, or play conquerer are the ones who cry the most!

 

Based on recent disputed Flamu's video, all the fanboiz are having some fest in youtube comments and here in the forum.

 

They are basically so religious people, because they don't give a damn on the hidden fact that flamu in the video was in a complete optimal situation where CQ could utilise its ALL potential ability.

 

What flamu says = fact <-get a grip and HAVE YOUR OWN OPINION PLEASE.

 

So today, I want to tell this fact to those sad crying babies from actual CQ player's perception.

 

Yes, it needs some nerf, for example, 

 

1 lower the firechance by 5~10% 

2 lower the maximum HE dmg by 1K

 

I think these two are the most favourable and reasonable amendment on the current CQ,

 

If you wanna get this ship nerfed on its concealment, there are tons of things to be considered additionally. So I don't think WG will choose this as one of their considerable options.

 

But what I really want to say is "CQ is strong overall, and OP in some situations (other BBs are same.. become OP in SOME SITUATION as well). It may need some nerf on HE but not significantly because it is not as OP as you are thinking"

 

I dont have conqueror yet. Lets take the lion. First of all that heal is sick. Much much better than yamato's old "super heal". IMO this is the first place where the nerf hammer should hit. Another point is, citadels. That ship doesnt have any citadels. (I have never hit a citadel on a conqueror. I often hit citadels on german BBs but not on top tier RN BBs) Citadels should be given to those ships at least at waterline. This is the second place for nerf hammer. Next point is the concealment. It shouldnt get undetected on 1v1 against non-RN BBs. Even against some CAs...

IMO, they can keep their super fire chance, if we get the tools to counter them. (Citadels... worse heal and worse concealment.)

 

After my opinion is said;

You called people babbies. Do you know how you sound with your own post? "They want to take my new toy away from me! Damn babbies! " exactly like this. Try to be objective if you want to let those "crying babbies" know the fact as an actual CQ player.

 

Edit: and why creating a new topic for that "post"? You could just write your opinion in the actual topic. Just saying.

 

 

[Exocet6951]

2 hours ago, P0CAH0NTAS said:

What I can see is,

 

Those who never own, or play conquerer are the ones who cry the most!

 

Based on recent disputed Flamu's video, all the fanboiz are having some fest in youtube comments and here in the forum.

 

They are basically so religious people, because they don't give a damn on the hidden fact that flamu in the video was in a complete optimal situation where CQ could utilise its ALL potential ability.

 

What flamu says = fact <-get a grip and HAVE YOUR OWN OPINION PLEASE.

 

So today, I want to tell this fact to those sad crying babies from actual CQ player's perception.

 

Yes, it needs some nerf, for example, 

 

1 lower the firechance by 5~10% 

2 lower the maximum HE dmg by 1K

 

I think these two are the most favourable and reasonable amendment on the current CQ,

 

If you wanna get this ship nerfed on its concealment, there are tons of things to be considered additionally. So I don't think WG will choose this as one of their considerable options.

 

But what I really want to say is "CQ is strong overall, and OP in some situations (other BBs are same.. become OP in SOME SITUATION as well). It may need some nerf on HE but not significantly because it is not as OP as you are thinking"

 

 

 

>free xp's account to play only high tiers
>gets all tier10 BBs
>gets 68% WR, 110k average damage in all of them

>Free xp's to Monarch, gets almost as much damage as a tier10 BB

>Free xp's to Conq, 80% WR 144k damage
> "Guys stop crying, Conq is fine. You don't know if you don't have it!"

Seems like most people saying that the Conq is mostly fine and maybe only needs a few tweaks are the ones outperforming their other ships by 25% and who spent the 60-100€ needed to skip all the way to the top of the branch.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[Jean_Bart79]

1 hour ago, ghostbuster_ said:

I dont have conqueror yet. Lets take the lion. First of all that heal is sick. Much much better than yamato's old "super heal". IMO this is the first place where the nerf hammer should hit. Another point is, citadels. That ship doesnt have any citadels. (I have never hit a citadel on a conqueror. I often hit citadels on german BBs but not on top tier RN BBs) Citadels should be given to those ships at least at waterline. This is the second place for nerf hammer. Next point is the concealment. It shouldnt get undetected on 1v1 against non-RN BBs. Even against some CAs...

IMO, they can keep their super fire chance, if we get the tools to counter them. (Citadels... worse heal and worse concealment.)

 

After my opinion is said;

You called people babbies. Do you know how you sound with your own post? "They want to take my new toy away from me! Damn babbies! " exactly like this. Try to be objective if you want to let those "crying babbies" know the fact as an actual CQ player.

 

Edit: and why creating a new topic for that "post"? You could just write your opinion in the actual topic. Just saying.

 

 

 

sorry but I do not really care if WG takes my 'NEW TOY' away because I don't play CQ that much and I prefer montana way more.

 

Thanks for showing your opinion here.

 

But seriously, why not playing CQ first?

 

It is strong, like I said. It may need some nerf. However, please note that I am not saying CQ does not require any amendment.

 

 

[waxx25]

raise the CQ's citadel and you can leave the rest.

[Exocet6951]

2 minutes ago, P0CAH0NTAS said:

 

But seriously, why not playing CQ first?

 

 

Because not all of us fall into WG's "spend 60€ to free xp the new powercreep branch, only for it to be powercrept in a year" business strategy?

[mtm78]

So

On 10/7/2017 at 7:14 AM, P0CAH0NTAS said:

What I can see is,

 

Those who never own, or play conquerer are the ones who cry the most!

 

Based on recent disputed Flamu's video, all the fanboiz are having some fest in youtube comments and here in the forum.

 

They are basically so religious people, because they don't give a damn on the hidden fact that flamu in the video was in a complete optimal situation where CQ could utilise its ALL potential ability.

 

What flamu says = fact <-get a grip and HAVE YOUR OWN OPINION PLEASE.

 

So today, I want to tell this fact to those sad crying babies from actual CQ player's perception.

 

Yes, it needs some nerf, for example, 

 

1 lower the firechance by 5~10% 

2 lower the maximum HE dmg by 1K

 

I think these two are the most favourable and reasonable amendment on the current CQ,

 

If you wanna get this ship nerfed on its concealment, there are tons of things to be considered additionally. So I don't think WG will choose this as one of their considerable options.

 

But what I really want to say is "CQ is strong overall, and OP in some situations (other BBs are same.. become OP in SOME SITUATION as well). It may need some nerf on HE but not significantly because it is not as OP as you are thinking"

 

 

80% wr 145k dmg Monqueror freexp *Edited spotted  

 

Your Yamato has 57%.... stop your *Edited attempt to keep the thing from being nerved in a way which makes it less broken  

 

edit:

 

On 10/7/2017 at 9:13 AM, Exocet6951 said:

 

 

>free xp's account to play only high tiers
>gets all tier10 BBs
>gets 68% WR, 110k average damage in all of them

>Free xp's to Monarch, gets almost as much damage as a tier10 BB

>Free xp's to Conq, 80% WR 144k damage
> "Guys stop crying, Conq is fine. You don't know if you don't have it!"

Seems like most people saying that the Conq is mostly fine and maybe only needs a few tweaks are the ones outperforming their other ships by 25% and who spent the 60-100€ needed to skip all the way to the top of the branch.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

Yeah.. should have just QFT'd. 

[Jean_Bart79]

On 10/7/2017 at 9:13 AM, Exocet6951 said:

 

 

>free xp's account to play only high tiers
>gets all tier10 BBs
>gets 68% WR, 110k average damage in all of them

>Free xp's to Monarch, gets almost as much damage as a tier10 BB

>Free xp's to Conq, 80% WR 144k damage
> "Guys stop crying, Conq is fine. You don't know if you don't have it!"

Seems like most people saying that the Conq is mostly fine and maybe only needs a few tweaks are the ones outperforming their other ships by 25% and who spent the 60-100€ needed to skip all the way to the top of the branch.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Okay so you got no money, no signals, no camos or no guts to play higher tiers? 

 

You know what? Thanks for looking at my stats, and I am proud of it cuz there is nothing to hide.

 

And I do not really give a damn if anyone says P0CAH0NTAS is simply free exp player. It is just my way and I do not like lower tiers much.

 

But just wanna tell ya a little tip. If you wanna discuss, then do it.

 

If you want to argue with my opinion, I am totally fine. Do it.

 

*Edited

 

[mtm78]

On 10/7/2017 at 9:27 AM, P0CAH0NTAS said:

*Edited

*Edited

[Jean_Bart79]

On 10/7/2017 at 9:26 AM, mtm78 said:

So

 

80% wr 145k dmg Monqueror freexp *Edited spotted  

 

Your Yamato has 57%.... stop your *Edited attempt to keep the thing from being nerved. 

*Edited

 

[Aotearas]

11 minutes ago, waxx25 said:

raise the CQ's citadel and you can leave the rest.

 

Make that for every BB with a below waterline citadel.

And for the CQ in particular, WG can easily just decrease the heal efficacy by 50% and it's still by far the best heal. But that's something WG can do after raising the citadels if the ship is still too powerful.

 

 

As for OP's "play it first before you comment" argument: I have plenty overall gameplay experience, I have the ship stats AND plenty third-party gameplay of the CQ in particular I can see to extrapolate how powerful the CQ is.

[Aotearas]

On 10/7/2017 at 9:34 AM, mtm78 said:

 

*Edited

 

 

*Edited

[kfa]

28 minutes ago, waxx25 said:

raise the CQ's citadel and you can leave the rest.

 

that wont be enough because of the DD camo rating

 

Raise the citadel AND butcher the firing angles to Arkansas Beta levels.

To be honest the best option would be to remove the moronic HE completely but thats too late i think...

[mtm78]

2 hours ago, P0CAH0NTAS said:

It may need some nerf on HE but not significantly because it is not as OP as you are thinking"

 

Just now, P0CAH0NTAS said:

Don't try to fxxk around with me by saying 'mostly fine' 

 

This doesn't sound similar at all. Which is why the reaction you're getting, and yes every single person I seen who is saying 'wellllllll it's not THAT imbalanced really' seems to have freexp'd to it and just wants to extent the time WG allows them to farm their stats with a broken ship. 

 

If that is not your intent, maybe try to be more clear what you want. Because just changing HE performance is likely not enough ( raised citadels at waterline AND a change in 419's seems the most likely ). 

[Jean_Bart79]

On 10/7/2017 at 9:46 AM, mtm78 said:

 

 

This doesn't sound similar at all. Which is why the reaction you're getting, and yes every single person I seen who is saying 'wellllllll it's not THAT imbalanced really' seems to have freexp'd to it and just wants to extent the time WG allows them to farm their stats with a broken ship. 

 

If that is not your intent, maybe try to be more clear what you want. Because just changing HE performance is likely not enough ( raised citadels at waterline AND a change in 419's seems the most likely ). 

This guy,

 

either can't read or lack of understanding ability.

 

I am out.

 

Again. If it needs nerf, it can be said to be 'mostly fine'

 

if mostly fine, why need nerf?

 

i said there may need some nerf on HE.

 

It is not as OP as you are thinking = It could be OP but not super OP as what other players think.

 

*Edited I never farmed my stats from broken ship.

 

*Edited

[Gnirf]

If you have played against a ship enough times and have access to paper values + stats for performace and WR you can judge their performace pretty well. Sure personal experience is an advantage but if a ship is OP is above all a stat interpreting skill (for server stats) + quality discussion. If you have like me f.e. over 13000 games (have all non CV T10s)you get a feeling for a ship by playing against it and if you are used to interpreting stats f.e. in your regular job it helps also. However  I do agree with some WG statements that Warships today etc has limited access to stats that are necessary for the strata stats .

 

F.e. when players stop playing a particular line, how many experienced players play the ship, distribution by different player stratas etc damage caused by fires etc and the impact their damagenumbers have, so by just stating a new ship is OP as it have high average damagenumbers is not correct. But it is the same with f.e. HE spamming cruisers the French are mostly played at a distance and therefor have lots of fire damage, that may not necessary win the game, (My anecdotal feeling is that I have higher damage numbers in them but less influence in deciding the game). It might be so in the RN. They will nerf it regardless of the whiners if they find it OP in both stats and quality (anecdotal) feedback. 

[RenamedUser_92906789]

2 hours ago, P0CAH0NTAS said:

Those who never own, or play conquerer are the ones who cry the most!

 

I was wondering when this will come up.

I dont have it on my acc, but I played it many times. Happy?

[mtm78]

On 10/7/2017 at 9:51 AM, P0CAH0NTAS said:

And for your broken eyes I never farmed my stats from broken ship.

 

80% wr 145k Monqerror -> I didn't farm stats with broken ship I swear guys.....

 

On 10/7/2017 at 9:51 AM, P0CAH0NTAS said:

*Edited

 

*Edited

[Mr_Snoww]

5 minutes ago, mtm78 said:

 

 

This doesn't sound similar at all. Which is why the reaction you're getting, and yes every single person I seen who is saying 'wellllllll it's not THAT imbalanced really' seems to have freexp'd to it and just wants to extent the time WG allows them to farm their stats with a broken ship. 

 

If that is not your intent, maybe try to be more clear what you want. Because just changing HE performance is likely not enough ( raised citadels at waterline AND a change in 419's seems the most likely ). 

im not gona try to argue with you about this as i have done before and found you infuriatingly stubborn and inexperienced, looking at the ratio of battles to your forum posts is well... worrying. so im just going to offer a friendly piece of advice to you. play a few more battles then maybe come back to the forums and give you opinions when you are a little bit more experienced and have played a larger variety of ships rather than pading your wr with your nikolai (most played ship) someone calling people out for playing an OP ship to pad stats. yeh... hypocrisy springs to mind here :) good day sir. 

[mtm78]

16 hours ago, Mr_Snoww said:

im not gona try to argue with you about this as i have done before and found you infuriatingly stubborn and inexperienced, looking at the ratio of battles to your forum posts is well... worrying. so im just going to offer a friendly piece of advice to you. play a few more battles then maybe come back to the forums and give you opinions when you are a little bit more experienced and have played a larger variety of ships rather than pading your wr with your nikolai (most played ship) someone calling people out for playing an OP ship to pad stats. yeh... hypocrisy springs to mind here :) good day sir. 

 

Like I said then, that battlecount on that ship is not increasing, so how about you go play with your friend instead of trying to make ad hominem remarks ok. 

[Jean_Bart79]

Just now, mtm78 said:

 

80% wr 145k Monqerror -> I didn't farm stats with broken ship I swear guys.....

 

 

I would suggest brain surgery for you, but I'm not sure there is enough to operate on. 

only played around 40battles with CQ lolol

 

and from RATING ASPECT, playing CQ is one of the worst option I can consider. <- this is also why I do not play the ship often

 

Always, it would be nice if you can stop being idiotic.

[Jean_Bart79]

2 minutes ago, Mr_Snoww said:

im not gona try to argue with you about this as i have done before and found you infuriatingly stubborn and inexperienced, looking at the ratio of battles to your forum posts is well... worrying. so im just going to offer a friendly piece of advice to you. play a few more battles then maybe come back to the forums and give you opinions when you are a little bit more experienced and have played a larger variety of ships rather than pading your wr with your nikolai (most played ship) someone calling people out for playing an OP ship to pad stats. yeh... hypocrisy springs to mind here :) good day sir. 

You are totally right Mr_Snoww. Had games with you in random battles sometimes. Thanks for giving me a good lesson!

[RenamedUser_92906789]

Can you guys keep this civil?

Do you really need insults and stat wars at 9AM?

 

Im slupring my coffee here and tryin to figure out why some of you defend ConquERROR as "its fine" ship when it clearly is not.

Its so retarded OP that many players that own it feel dirty while playing it ... including U all .... so the point of this is what again?

[Juanx]

To the OP, your new toy will get the nerf bat soo enough, and since its DG, you will most likely see it go below izumo levels of effectivity.

But hey keep telling everyone how wrong they are, maybe in your head it works?

[darkstar73]

Here  we go again :( It´s so [edited]strange that a player can´t say what he want in this forum.. Good or bad, right or wrong EVERYONE have the right to say what they want. And Pocahontas have acctually right quite right.