hate these ads?, log in or register to hide them
Page 249 of 278 FirstFirst ... 149199239246247248249250251252259 ... LastLast
Results 4,961 to 4,980 of 5559

Thread: World of Warships

  1. #4961

    Join Date
    November 4, 2012
    Posts
    332
    No Hogg, you misunderstand. Your argument is radar is needed because lots of DDs (getting 5 a side btw here at top tier is normal here), which pop smoke which then is used by the rest of the team (wish my server did this more). If this is the case then you as a cruiser should be no where near it and the 5 DDs on your team should be torping the crap out of that smoke. Again radar not needed, and again it leads to teams that are pushing aggressively being punished for using good tactics by 1 person pressing a button that says 'oh look I can see you' when you yourself might not even be visible (see my chapy example above / islands).

    The problem you feel is arising because of a massive fail of inter-class balance by WG. Every single time they've just done massive plasters over the issues rather than tweaking or rebuilding from the ground up. I used to be one of the few DDs on a team back in CBT / OBT pre CV nerf as I'd spend most of the game perma spotted. Once the CV nerf came through cruisers lost their major roles as AA support (especially since massive AA on BBs) and DD numbers rose quickly as they now weren't being perma spotted nor their torps. WG then slapped on radar as a plaster to try and curb DDs numbers and promote cruisers even though performance of all the DDs effected by radar is shit already (see Khaba stats - though it is getting nerfed again after its HE buff wtf WG). They've constantly had to buff cruisers to try and fix issues with mainly BBs i.e. being instantly deleted. First back in CBT the repair ability, then the ability to repair % citadel damage, fine no problem. But then radar plays around with a balance that was already present if the rest of WG systems worked i.e. CVs and spotting of DDs and torps and opposing side DDs pushing back against the smoke via torps etc.

    This is why your argument was invalid, radar punishes a class already performing badly, punishes those who decide to play aggressively, makes laying any form of a trap nigh impossible especially with hydro around too, is a sticking plaster for other classes shortfalls, discourages teamplay - why bother when it takes 1 person in 1 ship pressing 1 button to counter all the work you've done. Oh and lets not forget that a BB has access to it now and german BBs have insane hydro just to punish our torpedo boats that bit more!
    Last edited by Aranial; April 11 2017 at 03:48:07 PM.

  2. #4962
    Hoggbert's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 16, 2013
    Posts
    2,212
    Quote Originally Posted by Aranial View Post
    No Hogg, you misunderstand. Your argument is radar is needed because lots of DDs (getting 5 a side btw here at top tier is normal here), which pop smoke which then is used by the rest of the team (wish my server did this more). If this is the case then you as a cruiser should be no where near it and the 5 DDs on your team should be torping the crap out of that smoke. Again radar not needed, and again it leads to teams that are pushing aggressively being punished for using good tactics by 1 person pressing a button that says 'oh look I can see you' when you yourself might not even be visible (see my chapy example above / islands).

    The problem you feel is arising because of a massive fail of inter-class balance by WG. Every single time they've just done massive plasters over the issues rather than tweaking or rebuilding from the ground up. I used to be one of the few DDs on a team back in CBT / OBT pre CV nerf as I'd spend most of the game perma spotted. Once the CV nerf came through cruisers lost their major roles as AA support (especially since massive AA on BBs) and DD numbers rose quickly as they now weren't being perma spotted nor their torps. WG then slapped on radar as a plaster to try and curb DDs numbers and promote cruisers even though performance of all the DDs effected by radar is shit already (see Khaba stats - though it is getting nerfed again after its HE buff wtf WG). They've constantly had to buff cruisers to try and fix issues with mainly BBs i.e. being instantly deleted. First back in CBT the repair ability, then the ability to repair % citadel damage, fine no problem. But then radar plays around with a balance that was already present if the rest of WG systems worked i.e. CVs and spotting of DDs and torps and opposing side DDs pushing back against the smoke via torps etc.

    This is why your argument was invalid, radar punishes a class already performing badly, punishes those who decide to play aggressively, makes laying any form of a trap nigh impossible especially with around too, is a sticking plaster for other classes shortfalls, discourages teamplay - why bother when it takes 1 person in 1 ship pressing 1 button to counter all the work you've done. Oh and lets not forget that a BB has access to it now and german BBs have insane hydro just to punish our torpedo boats that bit more!

    How does radar discourage teamplay? If anything it should encourage more, since in order to benefit from the radar the radaring team need to pay attention to the radaring ship and be close enough to land reliable fire. At the same time the smoking team should support their dds with accurate fire to deny the radaring ships entry to the points where it can radar.

    I see a lot more decisive results from smoke in most matches than radars nullifying smoke or DDs.

    Also if dds are suffering so much, why are they so popular in the current meta? Why are UK cruisers so strong?

    I'll agree that the game has some glaring balance issues and rebalances tend to favor BBs more than anyone else, but i can't see how removing radar would improve the current meta at all.

  3. #4963

    Join Date
    November 4, 2012
    Posts
    332
    British cruisers are a world unto themselves. They use smoke as it's their armour and one of the few ways in which they can deal damage (also damn high skill floor on them). I have no issue with people using radar against me in my Belfast / Fiji it seems more than reasonable especially when I'm in the trying to do DD roles like capping.

    Radar can be a team promoter but it wrecks the team play of opposing teams where as smoke doesn't. Smoke also allows DD's to do their jobs especially when their isn't a replacement for it. Where as radar replacements include hydro, torping the smoke, heading into the smoke, planes circling overhead to spot torps etc. What tools are there to avoid radar? Especially when you lose most of your HP to radar especially if it's unexpected. I'd consider myself a damn good DD player (63% win rate in Shimakaze) and I absolutely fear radar because I know I'm fucked if I get spotted by it and I haven't planned for it heavily. DDs get punished for their mistakes heavily enough without having surprise butt sex from a ship they can't even see or escape. Don't tell me shooting a radar ship is the answer when they can do it from concealment, through rocks, smoke, etc. And I'll say again, all the stats point to non Russian DDs massively underperforming at higher tiers. On that note:

    Type 8 and type 93.mod 3 torps are being buffed with lower detection in 6.4. They also want to buff the yugumo (sp?) even more but will see how this buff works out. This comes on top of the small turret turn buff for the shima as well.

    Sent from my SM-N915FY using Tapatalk

  4. #4964
    Movember '11 Best Facial Hair, Best 'Tache Movember 2011Movember 2012Donor helgur's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 24, 2011
    Location
    Putting owls in your Moss
    Posts
    8,259
    Sorry but I too cannot see what benefit removing radar is going to bring to the game. Radar is a hard counter to a prevalent smoke usage that renders you immune to damage 80% of the time. Remove that and any DD/British cruiser captain worth his salt is getting too big of an advantage.

    Blindfiring/Torping smokes isn't a counter against smoke usage in itself. 8/10 games I play with a ship that relies on smoke i have no problems with this, it isn't an issue I need to worry about if I've used my smoke cleverly. And I can count on my hand the times people have actually managed to successfully blindfire me in my smoke, its not viable to the point it's not even an argument. It might be a problem if you're yoloing off all by yourself in your destroyer and meet a group of 3-4 players that has nothing else to shoot at but you. But then you would be kinda special if you decide to smoke up and stay there, and wait for the inevitable "counter".

  5. #4965
    mewninn's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    1,380
    Radar is dumb because it has no real limitations. Any moron can press F while sitting behind an island and insta detect everything around them. There's already too many buffs to idiots with things like the planes and perks like vigilance, why is more needed?

    It would be pretty reasonable if it was blocked by islands, or if it was directional so you only punish the unimaginative smoke spammers

    DDs were the only thing I didn't hate playing in high tier, because of the freedom to be aggressive. Now it seems like they're shackled to the same shitty passivity that plagues things like cruisers. Get too aggressive, and get wrecked by mongo moskva pressing F.

  6. #4966
    Hoggbert's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 16, 2013
    Posts
    2,212
    Quote Originally Posted by mewninn View Post
    Radar is dumb because it has no real limitations. Any moron can press F while sitting behind an island and insta detect everything around them. There's already too many buffs to idiots with things like the planes and perks like vigilance, why is more needed?

    It would be pretty reasonable if it was blocked by islands, or if it was directional so you only punish the unimaginative smoke spammers

    DDs were the only thing I didn't hate playing in high tier, because of the freedom to be aggressive. Now it seems like they're shackled to the same shitty passivity that plagues things like cruisers. Get too aggressive, and get wrecked by mongo moskva pressing F.
    As opposed to playing aggressive, then get wrecked by the enemy team dissapearing in a smoke cloud for fucking ages.
    mad skills smoking up yourself and the entire sodding team.
    Radar is the tool you need to keep the game somewhat dynamic, because smoke is such a strong defensive and offensive tool.

  7. #4967
    Movember 2012 Elriche Oshego's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 21, 2011
    Posts
    6,481
    Spaghetti


  8. #4968
    Liare's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    10,900
    Quote Originally Posted by Hoggbert View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by mewninn View Post
    Radar is dumb because it has no real limitations. Any moron can press F while sitting behind an island and insta detect everything around them. There's already too many buffs to idiots with things like the planes and perks like vigilance, why is more needed?

    It would be pretty reasonable if it was blocked by islands, or if it was directional so you only punish the unimaginative smoke spammers

    DDs were the only thing I didn't hate playing in high tier, because of the freedom to be aggressive. Now it seems like they're shackled to the same shitty passivity that plagues things like cruisers. Get too aggressive, and get wrecked by mongo moskva pressing F.
    As opposed to playing aggressive, then get wrecked by the enemy team dissapearing in a smoke cloud for fucking ages.
    mad skills smoking up yourself and the entire sodding team.
    Radar is the tool you need to keep the game somewhat dynamic, because smoke is such a strong defensive and offensive tool.
    to be honest, i wish smoke was purely defensive so that if you fire in it, you reveal yourself, that is of course going to heavily affect some ships but they can be rebalanced to account for the change tbh.

    being under fire with no ability to respond is basically the anti-dote to fun gameplay.
    Viking, n.:
    1. Daring Scandinavian seafarers, explorers, adventurers, entrepreneurs world-famous for their aggressive, nautical import business, highly leveraged takeovers and blue eyes.
    2. Bloodthirsty sea pirates who ravaged northern Europe beginning in the 9th century.

    Hagar's note: The first definition is much preferred; the second is used only by malcontents, the envious, and disgruntled owners of waterfront property.

  9. #4969
    Shaftoes's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Ships
    Posts
    1,501
    French cruisers seem quite interesting so far.

    i have the tier 5 one and the guns are excellent. They feel like slightly worse russian railguns and are highly accurate and don't bounce too often. ROF is really low, so that even though I tend to land multiple citadels every match I only end up with around 30-40k damage. The fire chance also seems really low.

    Bad points, both the tier IV and tier V ships are boxy floating citadels that eat shit from battleships

  10. #4970
    Hoggbert's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 16, 2013
    Posts
    2,212
    Quote Originally Posted by Shaftoes View Post
    French cruisers seem quite interesting so far.

    i have the tier 5 one and the guns are excellent. They feel like slightly worse russian railguns and are highly accurate and don't bounce too often. ROF is really low, so that even though I tend to land multiple citadels every match I only end up with around 30-40k damage. The fire chance also seems really low.

    Bad points, both the tier IV and tier V ships are boxy floating citadels that eat shit from battleships
    Fire chance low? what are you on about, my Emile Bertin sets fires more than my Zao. I found it to be a bit meh, until the game i just had and did 158k damage, so it does have potential.

  11. #4971
    Shaftoes's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Ships
    Posts
    1,501
    Quote Originally Posted by Hoggbert View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Shaftoes View Post
    French cruisers seem quite interesting so far.

    i have the tier 5 one and the guns are excellent. They feel like slightly worse russian railguns and are highly accurate and don't bounce too often. ROF is really low, so that even though I tend to land multiple citadels every match I only end up with around 30-40k damage. The fire chance also seems really low.

    Bad points, both the tier IV and tier V ships are boxy floating citadels that eat shit from battleships
    Fire chance low? what are you on about, my Emile Bertin sets fires more than my Zao. I found it to be a bit meh, until the game i just had and did 158k damage, so it does have potential.
    I dunno man, I just don't get any fires with these things. Too many things give me juicy juicy broadsides at lower tiers so I just use AP and aim for citadels most of the time

    Do you have demo expert? I only have a 5 point captain.

  12. #4972
    Hoggbert's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 16, 2013
    Posts
    2,212
    Quote Originally Posted by Shaftoes View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Hoggbert View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Shaftoes View Post
    French cruisers seem quite interesting so far.

    i have the tier 5 one and the guns are excellent. They feel like slightly worse russian railguns and are highly accurate and don't bounce too often. ROF is really low, so that even though I tend to land multiple citadels every match I only end up with around 30-40k damage. The fire chance also seems really low.

    Bad points, both the tier IV and tier V ships are boxy floating citadels that eat shit from battleships
    Fire chance low? what are you on about, my Emile Bertin sets fires more than my Zao. I found it to be a bit meh, until the game i just had and did 158k damage, so it does have potential.
    I dunno man, I just don't get any fires with these things. Too many things give me juicy juicy broadsides at lower tiers so I just use AP and aim for citadels most of the time

    Do you have demo expert? I only have a 5 point captain.
    I do, stole the captain from my dunkerque so got a 10 pointer, probably the difference. My Zao is notoriously cheap on the fires for some reason

  13. #4973
    Hoggbert's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 16, 2013
    Posts
    2,212
    Right, after a day of grinding through the t5 french cruiser and a couple of matches in the t6 frog i have to say i really like them.
    They dont have the range or dpm of russian cruisers or the range of the Jap cruisers torps, but really nice arcs on the torp launchers and good agility combined with fairly accurate guns make them quite potent.
    The Duca D'Aosta has been less impressive than the french cruisers, the AP is anemic over 10 km (i land more consistent citadels with the frogs) and while having 12 km torps is amusing, they're so slow its very easy to dodge them in brawling ranges.

    Most epic moment of yesterday was me, shaftoes and dracula in our Emile Bertins charging a division consisting of an Atlanta, Belfast and pensacola and we absolutely demolished them at the meager cost of one shaftoes

  14. #4974
    mewninn's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    1,380
    They seem like boring old HE spammers to me. One of those lines is enough for me

  15. #4975
    Hoggbert's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 16, 2013
    Posts
    2,212
    Quote Originally Posted by mewninn View Post
    They seem like boring old HE spammers to me. One of those lines is enough for me
    They're more just very well rounded cruisers, dont have the rof to really be considered spammers, but suit yourself.

  16. #4976
    mewninn's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    1,380
    at least I finally got the gearing.

    People complain a lot about it, but it feels like a strong upgrade over the Fletcher tbh.

  17. #4977
    Liare's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    10,900
    the upgraded secondary range on the tirpitz makes it a pretty monsterous ship at short ranges, truly the derpitz is even easier to derp with than ever.
    Viking, n.:
    1. Daring Scandinavian seafarers, explorers, adventurers, entrepreneurs world-famous for their aggressive, nautical import business, highly leveraged takeovers and blue eyes.
    2. Bloodthirsty sea pirates who ravaged northern Europe beginning in the 9th century.

    Hagar's note: The first definition is much preferred; the second is used only by malcontents, the envious, and disgruntled owners of waterfront property.

  18. #4978

    Join Date
    June 23, 2011
    Posts
    173
    OK, so about to get into WoW and I have to ask the stupid question: How do you choose what country to go with? I mean other than personal preference for lol-patriotism, what makes each country's ship line different (apart from some countries not having all ship lines, e.g. Germany has no carriers)?

    EDIT: NA or EU server better (I am US-based), quality- and population-wise?
    Last edited by Mythrantar; April 25 2017 at 03:26:24 PM.

  19. #4979

    Join Date
    November 4, 2012
    Posts
    332
    Go NA almost every time. The community is treated far better than us EU moneybags...

    Sent from my SM-N915FY using Tapatalk

  20. #4980
    Dregek's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Wirral
    Posts
    863
    For which nation I'd recommend starting with IJN or USN.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •