Jump to content

ruslanbear14

Beta Testers
  • Content Сount

    36
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    12147
  • Clan

    [O7]

Community Reputation

21 Neutral

1 Follower

About ruslanbear14

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Female

Recent Profile Visitors

665 profile views
  1. ruslanbear14

    Identifying Very Important Players

    As a very important player once posted:
  2. ruslanbear14

    Super Unicum needs help

    Solo unicum win rate is possible. Now is it enjoyable? Not really. Rather be in a division with 1 or 2 somewhat reliable teammates that you can communicate and work together to win.
  3. ruslanbear14

    Possible Solution to Radar

    Can only imagine you can see a lot more up in the tower than from grovelling in the dirt.
  4. ruslanbear14

    Possible Solution to Radar

    Considering the response rate of some of these people, it's no wonder. Anyways, radar is in a decent position right now with some tweaks here and there that are desirable but not necessarily needed. The perceived problem stems from the fact that the addition and popularity of the relatively new US cruisers are effective at countering DDs (getting adjusted in near-future). I fear that what some of these people are suggesting is to return to the era of pre-radar open water stealth firing for DDs which is a joke and will ruin the game.
  5. ruslanbear14

    Possible Solution to Radar

    I thought this thread was about radar and not stats?
  6. ruslanbear14

    I can't stand this.. we need an MMR system

    Skilled MM for randoms sounds good on paper, in practice? Not so much. At its core, random matches is where the vast majority of the players' intent is to be queued quickly into a match and blow stuff up. If implemented into this game, it will be a disaster. Sure, it might work the initial few weeks to first month but after that it is downhill. The reason being is that the population of this game is just too small to sustain such a MM. Queue times would be increasingly lengthy as MM struggles to match every player skill to an equivalent one at all times. Eventually, people would complain and skilled MM would switch to matches of bad vs bad, good vs good. This leads to stats converging to 50% for all and MM will start seeing the good and bad players as the same and we come back to the initial problem. A much more realistic balancing would be ship to ship balancing as some suggested before. For example, similar number of radar cruisers on both sides, or similar number of gunboat/torpboat focused destroyers. A more common reason I see games lost or won is the imbalanced composition of the teams rather than the distribution of player skill.
  7. ruslanbear14

    Possible Solution to Radar

    The fact that this thread still continues is bewildering and unfortunate.
  8. ruslanbear14

    DD's high tier game is bad

    1.) Handpicked examples from arguably higher skilled players than you would typically see. Any game would have a low skill floor class and BB rewards are in fact balanced. Your server performance metrics show that BBs always average less damage than their hp pool which shows many do not trade equitably with the opponent, unlike DDs and CAs that average 1.5x more than their hp's worth. Also, DDs damage sources would most likely be other DDs from the nature of contesting caps (BBs from other BBs), which gives more exp per damage dealt. 2.) Played since CBT, the DD was heavily OP in complete control in dictating engagement, with zero counter outside another DD or plane spotting. Open water stealth firing was absolutely broken and it is a good thing they changed smoke such that BBs cannot sit and stealth fire within. People have since adapted and averages have not changed significantly showing that your shell velocity change would not do anything in due time. 3.) DDs have another job that is unfortunately not tracked by these sites and not weighted at all, spotting damage. Factor that in and I would assume average ratings would skyrocket.
  9. ruslanbear14

    DD's high tier game is bad

    Where is this available? As far as I know, the usual sites only list average damage but not what ranges was this damage dealt at. You are assuming because they have the ability to fire at longer ranges that they must be spending time closer to those ranges. This advantage could be easily negated by the cruisers and destroyers closing the distance and using their stealth. The reason why BBs average higher among the player-base is because they are more forgiving than the other ship types. You have a heal at all tiers and their high damage per shell allows for less hits to make an impact. If you start looking at the higher skilled players' stats, you start seeing on average they perform much better in terms of average damage in their CAs/CLs than their BBs. Unlike BBs, their damage comes from mostly HE and fires which are I call empty damage as they allow the target to repair more of its hp than AP damage which is the BBs' primary damage source. If you are unable to dodge incoming fire that has been seen for 12+ seconds, that is completely on the player and not the game mechanics. People learn to aim according to the gun sights and the time-to-target estimation. Sure, it would be more of a challenge to everyone in shooting but eventually players would adjust to it. This essentially makes it a scaling change, not a game balance change. Ultimately, it would punish the average player (not the highly skilled players that you tend too source the "BB is OP" from) and make the game unfun for many. Judging from your posting, are you not free of being DD biased? Yes, some things like some BBs being equally if not better concealed than CAs is silly. However, DDs are the strongest class of the surface classes. They have strong map control from its flexibility/concealment to do so. Torpedoes not only do damage but perform area denial if they don't hit anything. Cruisers only have a finite number of radar and not all cruisers have this tool. This requires another DD to counter. If left alone, the DD is free to dictate when, where, and how to engage. I have seen games won more often on the quality of the DD than of any BB or CA/CL. This is balanced out by being the most fragile and mistake-punishing ship class. In fact, the difficulty of mastering shifts as you go up the tiers, with DDs being easiest at 1-4, BB at 5-8, and CA/CL at 9-10. If that is a skilled player than that is a pathetic use of the BB. If you get hit by someone who likely has 12+ second hang-time on shells, than that is on you.
  10. ruslanbear14

    DD's high tier game is bad

    Battleship main here, the amount of ignorance of what constitutes as effective battleship play is astounding. Sure, you can simply sit in spawn and shoot at maximum range on all targets. On certain combinations of maps and ships one can basically do this with little problem. Now, is this an effective use of said ship? Not at all. Beyond 15 km most BBs would have problems hitting on maneuvering targets that are cognizant of enemy fire. At the maximum range (23-26 km), hang-times would approach nearly 13 up to 18 seconds which is plenty of time to dodge the shots. Besides the issue of hang-times, the BB player would not be contributing their large hp pool to take damage for the team and run into the issue of being 100% reliant on team to spot. This, however, does not mean to charge in and die uselessly. This would be a worse way of play as the BB would just give free, easy points to the enemy. What comes down to effective battleship play would be measured aggression, knowing when to commit or run away with intention of returning to the fight. Typically, this would be within engagement ranges of 10-14 km, far below the maximum ranges of the battleships. This would be a horrible change that would needlessly punish the player-base. Ultimately will not be a factor as players would eventually adjust and we will return to the initial "problem" that we have. If the DD gets spotted by enemy CA/BB, then the fault lies on the DD. DDs have the best concealment and even before the battle begins, they had 30 seconds to read the enemy lineup and recognize potential radar threats. Barring few exceptions, radar threats are spotted well below their radar range. DDs very much deserve to be killed if they fail to recognize and respect this threat.
  11. ruslanbear14

    Possible Solution to Radar

    At minimum, radar would require at least the 1 person to be able to lay effective fire onto the spotted DD. Otherwise, it would only deter the DD from attacking for less than a minute and then the DD can resume whatever it intended to do. In addition, the DD would be aware of the potential radar (since majority of radar capable ships have detect range beyond radar range) and can play accordingly by doing activities such as moving just beyond radar range or baiting the radar at max range . Also, effective radar time is shortened due to the rendering nature of this game. In contrast, DFAA automatically increases dispersion and straight buffs the AA output in immediate effect. Beyond a few more tracers and holding alt, the CV player has no indication whether the DFAA is active/available for use. Though you can perhaps say, "Oh, why not just hover the planes outside AA range?" This is not simply a case with AA since players would typically activate when planes are well within the AA bubble and - due to the immediate nature of the consumable - shoot down a few planes before the CV player can react. In short, both are one click consumables, but both are fundamentally different with one needing some skilled firing input while the other is a 100% automatic feature.
  12. ruslanbear14

    Possible Solution to Radar

    The sudden increase in these types of threads coinciding with the arrival of US cruisers lends to the idea that it is just simply an over-saturation of radar capable ships due to the US cruiser hype. Similarly to the arrival of UK BBs and the multitude of HE spam whine threads, such "imbalance" will eventually go away with the hype dying out over time. As it stands, it appears that the radar problem is not a fundamental issue with the consumable but rather a problem of circumstances. If anything is to be changed, it would definitely be the DFAA consumable as it is a skill-less consumable that only requires a click of a button.
×