Jump to content


Beta Testers
  • Content Сount

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

  • Clan


Community Reputation

210 Valued poster


About Onyx

  • Rank
    Chief Petty Officer
  • Insignia

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

357 profile views
  1. They do intend to do some buffing of secondaries, but unless you have the equivalent of USN BB secondaries as standard, specifically Massachusetts, Georgia, and Ohio, it's a pretty massive nerf. I'm more concerned with the second part, encouraging sniping. The game already massively rewards DDs and CVs for playing correctly (primarily spotting). The spotting system and its sister counterpart, map design, go hand in hand to already encourage the toxic sniping to begin with, with a side order of "Should have played a long-range battleship." If the end-goal is to encourage players to get up in each other's faces and brawl at 10km or even closer, the game needs to allow people to actually get that close without fear of being spotted or existential annihilation after being spotted by stealth boats.
  2. Hate to break it to you, but there are objective "best" ships. Best Battleship: Ohio(Prem), Bourgogne (Prem). Kremlin. Everything else is objectively not nearly as good. Best cruiser: Stalingrad (Prem), Venezia. There's a number of other good tier 10 cruisers such as the Colbert, Worcester, and Smolensk (Allegedly the Puerto Rico is also good, but with only 160 battles to compare it's not worth mentioning). Best DD: Summers(Prem), Klemer (Prem), Daring, Yueyang. Best CV: King of the Bads, Audacious. All CVs are about the same win rate, and there's very few CVs that realistically influence games. The CV rework has basically made their influence on the progression of games meaningless and this is reflected in any stats website you can find. What's interesting about the raw statistics is that very few ships are broken. Even though some ships are "bad," they still are about average on the whole. Very few are so bad they drag the team down just by existing, but there are quite a few that are so good that you can carry teams to victory with them. Those ships are basically the ones listed, as determined by raw statistics since I have literally not used any of them. That said, advice I gave in WoT: The best ship for you is not necessarily the best ship, period. I became somewhat famous for being able to take the tier 9 American heavy tank, the T34, and being able to slaughter enemy teams with it. The T34 was, objectively, the worst tier 9 heavy until its eventual downgrading to a T8 premium and replacement with the M103. But for me, I did the best on the T34 compared to other T9 heavies at the time, and could carry games on it because it just clicked with me. The same is probably true in WoWS. You will need to play a lot of things to find your style, but at the end of the day, what fits for you is going to be unique. Even bad BBs like the Yamato or Montana (as determined by statistics) can (probably) do exceptionally well in the hands of players who decide to master them and play them correctly. They just won't be as easy to do as well on compared to ships with statistically high average win rates.
  3. Hahahahahahahaha. HAHAHAHAHA! No, Scharnhorst's fire control was one of the worst fire control systems of any battleship. Actually, the Kriegsmarine in general was, to put it mildly, absolutely garbage at designing ships during WWII. The Scharnhorst and Bismark are 2 of the best examples of how not to design ships, and they can be seen in bizarre and dumb design decisions, such as Bismarck's ridiculous requirement to be able to go from full ahead to full astern in under a minute. That design requirement considerably weakened the stern of the ship due to having to alter how the back end was designed to accommodate it, and this lead to the Bismarck's rudder being especially vulnerable to damage, which caused the rudder to be disabled and ultimately lead to her sinking. German ships around WWII are defined by a few major characteristics: A pathalogical fear of radar. Ridiculously over-armored ships for their displacement with designs derivative of German WWI ships (back when Germany knew how to design ships) but lacking real innovation. Ridiculously under-gunned ships for their displacement, this goes hand in hand with being over-armored. A bizarre cavalcade of terrible design decisions caused from the working environments of Germany's Marineamt in WWII. The only thing Germany got right about WWII warship design was sticking to having turtleback armor schemes in the north atlantic. And they technically floated, I guess. But the quality of German ship design took a steep nosedive after WWI, exclusively because the Treaty of Versailles gutted the Reichsmarineamt, and the Marineamt that replaced it just wasn't remotely as good as what came before. A fun read on the working conditions and general problems of the Kriegsmarine and Marineamt during WWI. There's quite a few pieces of info on it, actually, including how the Navy basically abandoned active radar in some articles. The point of this, however, is to provide a source when I say that the Scharnhorst did not have superior fire control. And I quote:
  4. The mistake you're making is assuming they're terribly thought out. They were designed and intended this way. Someone in WG decided to make the events dumb and functionally impossible for anyone who didn't pay. It's impossible for people who pay, too, they just actually can complete enough of it anyways! By design they decided to make this horrendous. It probably didn't even start out horrendous, but someone told them they needed to add a few zeroes. If you look at the event and assume everything was supposed to have 1 fewer zeroes in it, it starts to look a lot more reasonable. Hard, sure, but reasonable.
  5. No no no, I wasn't being reasonably sarcastic. I was being unreasonably sarcastic to the point where it looped back around on itself and became reasonable, and should therefore apologize to Wargaming. I'm sorry wargaming, I'm sorry for being unreasonably sarcastic to your unreasonable grind. I'll flog myself ten times in penance.
  6. Sorry, I must not have written sarcastically enough for the sarcasm to clearly come through. /s.
  7. See, there's your problem. You thought this was a reasonable grind, you are clearly mistaken and are a whiny baby expecting handouts. You may as well spit in a grocers face for not just handing you food for showing up at a supermarket! Really!
  8. Psh, at least mention that you're paraphrasing. The actual quote is: "...I don't think that's entirely realistic, because we do have to actually, like, work. I'm sorry." Later parts of the stream comment on how they'd have to have someone play for the entirety of while they're at work well into mid-january, being paid to grind the PR, and how that wasn't reasonable for someone who has other requirements at work, trying to deflect away literally spending all of your free time doing this grind despite doing this on our "free time." It's sickening, really, how tone deaf they are. He was very polite about telling the community to piss off.
  9. Unless at least 60% of the playerbase who is active, playing only once a week for, let's say 5 hours, can get this item, then it's not good enough as an apology. This should be a ship that the majority of people in the playerbase, including new players (but at least tier 5) can reasonably expect to get. They need to nerf this not by 1, but several orders of magnitude.
  10. I disagree. It is reasonably attainable with all 3 boosters, you just need to do 3 of the directives fairly quickly but in a reasonable time frame. Throw in a gorizia and you can basically half-[edited]your way to the minimum required directives provided you get the boosters by day 1 and work to get the first 3 within that a week each, which is, again, reasonable. The problem is that will cost you a minimum of about $130, and while you'll get a "refund" of the gorizia to the tune of $34 in dubs, that's still a lot of time and money to make the grind reasonable. And, if you don't buy the gorizia? Well, it's still somewhat reasonable, just not stressless reasonable, and you might need to push for the fourth directive and an extra mission if you go this route. So this is "reasonnably" attainable for ~$94 USD + a significant grind, or $130 USD with a slightly more laid back grind. All while presented as being freely attainable to the average player. Oh, did I forget to mention that you had to do this during the holidays of visiting people and socializing? Because you have to do this while visiting people and socializing.
  11. I was considering it until I realized that, even with the boosters, I would still need to grind if I didn't want to fork over more Arbitrary Money Units to finish it off. So they're also trying to trick people, even those who think they might want to go in, into spending more because if you're 100 deep, what's a few extra (insert future discounted price here) to make sure the investment isn't wasted? The event is disgusting.
  12. There's 2 ways to interpret his question. "Do I need the Gorizia to get any of the missions?" and "Do I need the Gorizia to do the Gorizia missions." To which the answer is technically no. The Gorizia is only required to complete specific missions dedicated to it. For everyone else, it's there to entice you into buying a gorizia instead of getting a free one.
  13. You're forgetting the most important thing. The dock is set dressing for the patient people, or the people who paid to buy the ship. It's there to give you self-affirmation that you made a good purchasing decision as you get to watch the ship build itself up in whatever way it actually does, however accurate it may or may not be. For everyone else, well, you're just set dressing for the whales. Peasants who can gaze longingly in to the world you, the whale, live in. You exist to validate the people who spend, spend, spend, and your griping (can) actually bring tears of joy to the whales. And to others, the dolphins, gullible poor, or even curious, the dock serves to give you just the tiniest bit of extra push to spend money. "Maybe if I get the boosters, I can see it finished" or "I don't want to miss out!" The dock is fancy because that extra bit of polish makes some people feel good, while it makes others want to open up their wallets a little bit more, just for the presentation. That is what it accomplishes, and I believe I am safe to say that it does a very, very good job. And when people start feeling good, or special, they really open up their wallets.
  14. I'm happy you had the ability to buy fun things. Not everyone has the ability to drop $260 on a single game though, at least not all at once. The problem ultimately comes down to one thing though. This was touted as a free tier 10 ship for the playerbase, and this ship is unreachable for the overwhelming majority of players. So while technically free, in practice the majority will never have a chance for it. Only super unicums with tons of flags and the ability to play very consistently with a repertoire of tons of ships at their disposal so they don't need to grind up numerous tier 8 ships will have a chance at getting this.