Jump to content

CaliburxZero

Alpha Tester
  • Content Сount

    1,276
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    4559
  • Clan

    [FAE]

Community Reputation

387 Excellent

About CaliburxZero

  • Rank
    Lieutenant Junior Grade
  • Birthday October 17
  • Insignia
    [FAE]

Contact Methods

  • Skype
    caliburxzero

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    United States-- A State you don't want to be in.
  • Interests
    Anime of all kinds, Gaming, Fencing, Sci-Fi stuff, and most of all sleeping

Recent Profile Visitors

4,402 profile views
  1. CaliburxZero

    Just got AFK'd for power outage :-(

    Its a minor inconvenience at best. Besides, legitmate DC or not as others have said here... you also made your team suffer regardless because of it.
  2. CaliburxZero

    Nerf Worcester Harder

    Spinning the words of what i'm saying to say "its all worcester's fault T10 gameplay is so passive". Nice. I guess changing up a few words will suit your argument all you like, although its style of gameplay clearly reinforces it which is what i was saying. Battleships can do exactly that to cruisers at most mid-high tiers, except passive problems only start to happen at top tiers. Go figure. This is something I was hearing constantly when it was in development, and just now went to check the hitbox myself and you are correct. Even so, doesn't change the fact that the ship is definitely over-performing.
  3. CaliburxZero

    Nerf Worcester Harder

    I'm glad someone bothered to say this. No, worcester is not. Its citadel hitbox sits below the waterline... so this ship can just yolo charge and only eat full pens, no citadels at close range reliably. This is a fact that I think only Flamu I have seen mention in one of his videos. I guess people want to pretend such a large benefit that most cruisers can only dream about doesn't exist. ^^ I mean, what did people expect when it came to this ship? Very stealthy, crazy DPM that can threaten anything, radar, even CVs can't really touch it. The only downside to this ship is its arcs and shell flight time, so positioning is key. And if nothing else, its a ship that reinforces the camping meta of "sit behind an island, lazily fire at everything" that slows gameplay down.
  4. CaliburxZero

    Why is WG pushing Tier 10 so hard?

    Did you really just say with a straight face that a game doesn't have to be "fun"? Okay, I think you need to look up what "Game" and "Entertainment" means. And here i thought I've seen it all when it comes to bad arguments here...
  5. CaliburxZero

    Royal Navy ARC DD mission drop rate

    Same exact luck. I've opened every free container possible right now, only received the T5. Every time they have a loot box event thing like this come up, its been consistently less and less generous. Of course, that's not to say it is given my sample size but it does make one wonder. Well, if they keep this up I don't know how many people here follow gaming news, but the days of game companies doing loot boxes may be coming to a swift end in the near future. *Maniacal laughter*
  6. CaliburxZero

    Server overloaded? 13k players?

    I've had it happen too, at first i thought it was my own connection but it seems its not looking at this thread. Odd. I think this is the first time I've actually seen this problem before on warships
  7. CaliburxZero

    USS West Virginia In A Nutshell

    Well, that's just your opinion. While I have no horse in this race as either way I don't like 21 knot speeds, the request for a modernized West Virginia as a unique premium has been around for a very, very long time. If WG has the slightest modicum of attention paid to the forums and their dedicated playerbase, it should come as literally no surprise there are upset people. Its not a question of whether or not the ship will be competitive or fun, that's what we call in the business for the point of contention a "Red Herring".
  8. CaliburxZero

    Tired of losing.

    I've had the same experience tonight in my new Ship Henry. So now i'm sitting at 6 wins, 8 losses and its SUPER infuriating. I've recently come back (yet again) to the game and every time I come in to play... I truly, honestly feel the game is getting worse for the player's base level of skill. 4 losses in a row but here's the kicker: The game gets to end abruptly before I can really burn through all my heals on my Henry and consumables, where my team manages to make ZERO kills or only 1 or 2 outside of my own. Maybe its just weekend fail players on top of anniversary players coming back tonight, but wow. I've played alot of PVP games in my day, but I can say with "my hand on a bible" that the only games I've experienced such one-sided victories and such helplessness of my own ability to make a difference is this, and world of tanks. I wonder why.
  9. I think T8 matchmaking is horrible, and my solution is simple: Make +1/-1 matchmaking to *only* T10 OR... Make T10's chances of seeing T8 significantly reduced. Outside of potato T10 players, I don't think I've ever heard someone in their T10 say, "gosh darn it, a bunch of other T10s i'm up against!" or something to that effect. I doubt many would care in their T10s, and it'd make life easier for T8s, while also indirectly buffing T9s and their MM a bit if the latter and not the former is done.
  10. Listening to this to calm my nerves as I try ranked out once more:  

     

    1. BlailBlerg

      BlailBlerg

      He wrote music for one of my favorite games too =) 

    2. CaliburxZero

      CaliburxZero

      Oh really?  Nice.  Didn't realize he made OST for games.

  11. Of course not, but if that's an issue then i'll happily step in-- And say T8 MM is awful.
  12. CaliburxZero

    Possible Solution to Radar

    I think your reasoning is actually sound and would be a band-aid fix though at best... I still believe Radar needs to be changed fundamentally. Perhaps my fix is a bit complicated, but to simplify it a bit i'd say only have one type, the one i mentioned that can't see through Cover/needs LOS. OR and the main reason why i'm posting here... Have radar "pulse" for its duration. Keep it the way it is, but have it start at the 12 o'clock position and go all the way around as if its "scanning" for the target. Then have ships spotted for 3-4 seconds each time. Then they can just test out at what time interval they want it to re-pulse and scan again for balance. Just another idea. But either way, I think its safe to say Radar is out of hand. I don't even play DD a ton and think its crazy. Radar slows down gameplay too much.
  13. I'd have to be in disagreement with spotting and just AP bombs being nerfed. If it were that simple then a rework wouldn't be in order. Spotting is way too broken for Carrier, straight up. There's no way you can tell me a single player should be allowed to strip away every single DD's ability to hide at will, force them to smoke so they can't be fired on, then dropped with TBs in that smoke because they are cornered. No. And this is coming from someone who plays BB the most of any class. AP bombs were a mistake full-stop. The damage power of CVs was already the best at high tier, why did they need yet another tool to delete ships? The bombs were in the end just something people begged for, knowing just the type of power it'd do. Too long have I been on these forums for people trying to defend the balance. Even in the face of WG releasing official statements on CV overperforming, statistics that completely solidify CVs utter dominance on the battlefield, and some of the top players/youtubers coming out to support these ideas? What I don't even understand is how people have the audacity to even argue CV isn't broken anymore. And its broken imo from a fundamental standpoint and sadly... that's the benefits of the RTS system.
  14. While a true comment, this is one that masquerades reality. As Flamu put it, at the top-end... Carriers top the charts by a large margin every single major metric in a player's performance (including WR). If you seriously want to ignore the simple fact that any top-end player in a CV has infinitely more power, influence, and control over a match than anybody else could even hope or dream about... then your bias is showing. I've been around for as long as you have and find it wholly shocking that another veteran on this game has the audacity to pretend CVs are not horribly unbalanced. Ladies and Gentlemen whether you like it or not, current CV gameplay has too much power. The devil is in the details: The ability to spot effectively permanently with little to no risk multiple areas on top of swiftly guiding a swarm of death squads to nuke anything on the map at speeds that any other ship could dream about is guess what? Not balanced. Why do you think WG is changing it in the first place to this extent? I'm sorry, but the time to allude that CVs have any semblance of balance has long since past. Oh and name ONE other class that is designed to be balanced against ITSELF and demands only 1-2 per team because of the sheer power they have? Oh right, ONLY CARRIER. PS, needing to limit something's power using itself no less as the limiter is by definition a overpowered mechanic.
  15. CaliburxZero

    Possible Solution to Radar

    Jeez this thread is long, not that its surprising given how radar is these days. I don't know how popular of an idea it will be but here goes: I believe radar should work like this: Radar should be projected in an "aimable" arc relative to the front of the ship, and you can choose any direction. From there, only within the cone selected will you detect ships. There should be two types: A longer duration you see on ships but shorter range but also cannot see through solid cover, and then a shorter duration but longer range but also cannot see through solid cover. And for the duration, you would have to actively "aim" the cone to adjust as necessary swapping away from your guns. And of course, when radar is in use all teammates should see a notification above the ship like of the Radar symbol to know its in effect. oh and when it comes to nations and radar variance, Have the area of effect, ranges, and duration balanced differently for "flavor".
×