Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles


Community Reputation

13 Neutral

About Kochira

  • Rank
    Petty Officer
  • Insignia
  1. All powerful Radar

    Logic lets me make that claim: a no restrictions matchmaker would be very fast as it would put players on teams the instant the queued up. A matchmaker that had a list of specific ships it needs to form a team would have to wait for that exact combination of ships to be in the queue to form a team, which would take longer. Your solution is not to balance the ships its to balance the teams. The better alternative is to change the ship stats to balance them. Exactly how you balance the ships isn't important because even if I don't have a specific plan for it we know it is possible. Balancing the teams is currently being used in game to attempt to fix ship balance issues. It is most strongly applied to CVs, but top tier BBs and CA are also mirrored. In addition matchmaker has a strong but not absolute tendency to mirror the types of the non-top tier ships. (this is why we can't use win rate to compare between ship types) How good do you think its track record is?
  2. All powerful Radar

    I don't know why you are so hung up on the CV example just because its magnitude is greater. Especially when you agree with me here. The last bit is rather dishonest though. I'm not advocating doing nothing, I want the ships changed so they are balanced against their opponents. I didn't say how much it would affect wait times because its impossible to know unless wargaming releases their matchmaking algorithm. this issue isn't a huge one on its own but the more you use this solution the worse it gets, and we already have it for top tier BBs, CAs and all CVs. I wasn't thrilled about that bit of news. then don't bring it up, its irrelevant to your argument. My argument is invalid just because I don't have a suggestion to balance radar cruisers? OK. Remove Radar and buff something else if the ships are under performing their fellow cruisers. Wargaming will never do it though. You seem to generally agree with the points I made but get hung up on things like the example not exactly matching or not noticing that piling up the same small problem will eventually be a bigger problem. Why keep using a solution that will create more problems down the line? And exactly how do you know DDs are performing well compared to other ship types? Its only more difficult if you have a habit of playing ships that are better than their peers. Tier 10 is the best balanced tier in the game. The only ships that are massively unbalanced against other ships of their type are DDs. Balance is what pushes win rate statistics for a ship toward 50%.
  3. All powerful Radar

    Are you saying that bringing a weak ship does not mean that the rest of the team has to perform better to cover that weakness? I use CVs as an example because they are uncontroversially over powered and your proposed solution to radar imbalances is currently implemented on them. I'm not saying that radar cruisers are as strong as CVs. I'm pointing out that your solution has been tried and has flaws. What if the 3 radar cruisers are in a division? what if the radar cruisers are different tiers? matchmaking looks simple but its actually rather complex. Especially because some of the rules it works on are more like guidelines. Adding more rules increases the complexity. At the extreme you could give matchmaker a specific fleet of ships and have it start a match only when it has gathered two fleets to fight, that would take forever though. Complexity increases wait time. You are trying to fix two different sources of imbalance with one rule here, one is the imbalance of radar ships and the other is an imbalance of player skill. Your example would work out but mirroring ships does nothing to prevent great player from being stacked on one team. For that you need a reasonable measure of player skill and another rule for matchmaker to follow adding even more complexity. On the other hand if you balance the ships themselves you add no complexity at all.
  4. All powerful Radar

    I'm not really in favor of balancing things in matchmaker. When a poor CV player is matched against a good CV player, the poor players team suffers because they can't pick up the slack. More restrictions make it harder to form games in a reasonable time. I think each player should have an equal opportunity to contribute to a match. Mirror matching is a quick and easy fix but it doesn't address the underlying problem so issues can creep up elsewhere. so you forgot where you said that warships.today was down but decides I was a 45% win rate player based on nothing? If I though there was a chance wargaming would implement it sure, I would put the effort in. But for you? nah not worth it. That is correct, you can't use win rate to compare the strength of a DD vs a CA. The DD vs CV thing was an example to prove the point so it isn't meaningless. I chose to use DD vs CV because on the two week stats Gearing has a win rate of 49.28% and Hakuryu has a very close win rate of 49.43%. Hiryu(51.48%) and King George V(51.39%) would work too. I find it odd that you agree with me here considering I was refuting Madwolf05's assertion that DDs were doing fine based on their win rate. You seemed quite happy with his point less than an hour before. Do you like contradicting yourself? If they balanced radar CA though matchmaker they would effectively be a ship type. Why would you expect torpedoes to be single use when the guns you encounter earlier in the game also reload and have infinite ammo? How is it more unintuitive than suddenly gaining x-ray vision?
  5. All powerful Radar

    so making up stats in an attempt to discredit the opposition rather than their argument is reasonable? Even if Cruisers do need an extra tool to counter DDs at high tiers that doesn't necessarily mean radar is the right tool for the job. This is wrong. by that measure Hakuryu and Gearing have about the same impact on a game, and that's absurd. What you missed when looking at the win rates is how the matchmaker influences things. Matchmaker has a very strong tendency to pair up ships of the same type and tier and place them on opposite teams. As a result, the win rate stats you get for a ship only reflect its performance against other ships of its type and tier. At tier 10, those high performing DDs are actually an example of how imbalanced DDs are against each other. To illustrate: imagine two mixed fleets composed of the exact same ships except for one. one fleet gets an extra DD and the other gets an extra carrier. Would you expect these fleets to have a 50% win rate? Wargaming actually did this to a ship type in game. CVs are restricted bu matchmaker to always have another CV of the same tier on the opposing team. In addition CVs are limited to 2 per side in the mid tiers and 1 per side at high tiers. If a team without a ship is at such a disadvantage to a team with that ship that you have to mirror them in the matchmaker, then isn't that the definition of unbalanced? I'm still wondering if you think intuitive means realistic. It's important concerning your "torpedo reload is unintuitive" argument.
  6. All powerful Radar

    If you're trying to talk to reasonable people why do you ignore evidence when it suits you? Why do you make up numbers that support your point when they can be easily verified? These actions don't encourage people to continue reasonable discourse with you.
  7. All powerful Radar

    Did you just admit that you are a tool? I find this behavior very familiar for some reason.
  8. Point 1 and 3 seem like the same point are valid. One way to work around it would be to start the game with fog banks or a typhoon to let the BBs move up into position.
  9. All powerful Radar

    Did the slang for rushing to the optimal torpedo launch point change or something? because Island ambushes are different. DD burst damage is highly situational, and at the higher tiers you encounter those situations less and a DDs ability to survive those situations is lessened. none of this supports your position that DDs are good at solo stalling a push, but whatever. First of all: Any 2 ship combo? did you forget that CVs were a thing? and how bad DDs are against them? Second the only reason you none wants to push into that is radar. Without radar that encounter is the standard early cap contest where a few DDs enter the cap and both teams shoot at them from relative safety. in that encounter the skill of each team determines the outcome, but with radar the DD is forced away or killed. One button and a ship is negated regardless of their skill level. Two things: please quote me where I claimed to be a coach and quite frankly, you have no way of knowing if I am or am not. You wouldn't know even if I tell you, I could be lying. so you cant check my stats, but your sure I'm a 45% player because? Whatever. Lets look at the numbers. Well be using the 90 day solo random matches and ships tier 7+, sound reasonable? For your stats its fairly easy because only 11 of your 214 games were tier 6 or lower so warships.today's 90 day average should be pretty accurate. (bump it up a bit because you had some bad luck in the low tiers) Your win rate for that time period is 48.6%. Well, you clearly are not a 45% player, its a good thing I never said you were. My stats are a little harder but I'm saved by the lack of diversity in my high tier games. Out of a total of 55 games that fit the criteria I won 34 of them, giving me a 61.81% win rate. As this is significantly higher than my all time average and a low number of games I can assume that this period was a lucky streak and that the all time win rate is a better measure of my ability. the Data I used will be attached as screenshots to this post. So, you made up stats to try to discredit my skill at the game. Doesn't that hurt your credibility? And as I recall this isn't the first time you've done that to me. A certain cruiser and battleship in my top 10 most played ships somehow became IJN DDs to your eye. Why should your opinion on the state of the game be held in high regard when you do things like that? You have over three THOUSAND "randumb" games (and lose about the same percentage of those that I do) most of those are solo as well. "I have played competitive" isn't a very good argument for being a better player than me. The reason is simple: I have not played competitive. How do you compare something to no data? I mean we could compare results in PvE but we both play so little of that game type the results would be horribly imprecise. I'm just comparing apples to apples instead of oranges. And leave my fetishes out of this I'm not going to tell you them and I really don't want to know yours. My bad. I articulated my point poorly, so its understandable that you don't get it. I'll try again: Why should I be worried about the damage from a ship (Shimakaze for example) that, over the course of an entire match does, on average 13% of the damage a single full salvo of her torpedoes will do? Wait. Do you think intuitive means realistic? That would explain why you keep bringing up realism.
  10. All powerful Radar

    How often do high tier DDs succeed on a suicide torp run? Why are you trying to prop up DDs as some massive damage dealer? one look at the stats easily shows that they are not. You are looking at the potential damage of a DD and assessing it as a huge threat one that is good at stalling a push. so how does a low damage ship accomplish this on its own? Torpedoes don't cut it, do you know how long it take an average Gearing to torpedo a BB to death? way to toot your own horn there, did you realize that by that logic most coaches understand their game less than their star players? clearly I'm a bad player whom no one would want on their team, but I like numbers, they don't lie to you like people do. Solo statistics seem appropriate right? win rate: 51.70% vs 52.77% I don't really have much faith in WTR but in case you do: 1,031 vs 1,063. These numbers seem to be within the margin of error to me so I guess we both have little to no understanding of how the game works, meta impact or the roles of ships. Quite arrogant of the doctor who has the same pay as a barista. I'm still waiting for you to explain why I should take maximum potential into account for threat assessment in some rare occurrences but not others. That's actually really easy. Radar through islands is exceedingly unintuitive, it works nothing like a player will expect it to, which is bad game design. Not that I expect you to address that point, you seem to prefer mud slinging to civil discourse.
  11. All powerful Radar

    so why is the potential damage (that is never reached) of torpedoes worth considering? It would be nice for you to quote where I made a realism argument. sure you can shoot at that range, if you don't mind waiting a minute or more for your torpedoes to interact with your target and having gaps in your spread that you could sail a BB through sideways. I like how you assumed I was just talking about torpedoes there. Most DDs aren't great at long range gunnery either. And how often do you do this? Three racks are good but the hit and fire rates are abysmal, what good is the damage if it barely hits more than 1 in 20? Radar isn't as effective against running DDs so I'm not buying your assertion that its the reason stalling a push solo is harder at higher tiers. Especially when there is a better explanation: High tier DDs are terrible torpedo boats. 1st: Emile Bertin and Kongo are DDs now? 2nd: and your vast experience with high tier IJN DDs means you are totally qualified to talk about them? 3rd: today I learned: half equals most (assuming you count my Umikaze games in the 40s category) 4th: oh hey! you got something right If your going to stat shame at least get your facts strait. from warships.today: Mostly plays cruisers, especially high-tier and is very good in them Deals an above average amount of damage Key vehicle - Des Moines Is your perspective any better? If my arguments are bad it should be trivial to debunk them with data and logic. Why are you resorting to cheap attacks that easily backfire? Do you have any argument at all?
  12. you could put some submarines in like that, IJN Chiyoda carried the type A Ko-hyoteki submarine in her seaplane tender configuration. The midget subs could work kinda like really slow torpedo bombers which would give Chiyoda a very unique play style for a carrier.
  13. All powerful Radar

    A cruiser can potentially deal 79,350 damage to a battleship with a single bullet. Does this mean BBs should avoid combat with CAs? Potential damage is probably the most worthless characteristic to use to evaluate a ship. Why would it have to be buffed? Radar is mostly a cruiser vs destroyer weapon. Nerfing it would affect that balance instead of the balance between cruisers, so the loss needs no buff compensate on that account. Cruisers and destroyer are not balanced and changing radar to not go through islands would not make them balanced, so why do they need a compensating buff for that How is engaging the enemy at close range not aggressive? The only DD line that dosen't specialize in that is the Russians. High tier IJN DDs are terrible at actually stalling pushes though. The only manage to do so because of a reputation earned by their lower tier counterparts. When called on to perform they usually fail miserably.
  14. All powerful Radar

    The problem with arguments like this is the torpedo threat from DDs changes drastically with the tier. The torpedo threat from Minekaze is very different from the torpedo threat from Shimekaze. It also ignores how a BB can pre angle to minimize the torpedo threat when entering risky waters. For an Island ambush to delete a full health BB, it has to present a good angle for a torpedo launch to the ambush, which is entirely under the BBs control. As for how you win a knife fight w/ a DD, you keep your bow or aft pointed at them and fire everything you've got. At the higher tiers it works more often than not. There can be value in a threat but I don't think high tier DDs have the teeth to back that threat up. the threat of a DD is pitiful compared to the threat of a BB at the high tiers.
  15. Shima needs top buff

    given the average torpedo hit rate of the respective ships, a Shimakaze takes over 7 minutes to kill a 82900 hp ship, A Minekaze takes just under 4 minutes to kill a 70700hp ship. This doesn't take into account TDS or heals. The conclusion I draw from this is that Shimakaze is a garbage torpedo boat and what makes that really sad is even with that lousy performance shes the best tier 10 torpedo boat.