Jump to content


  • Content Сount

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

Community Reputation

293 Excellent

About SeigeTank2010

  • Rank
    Warrant Officer
  • Insignia

Recent Profile Visitors

647 profile views
  1. SeigeTank2010


    When they do, I wonder if they'll have guns that can destroy a battleship in about a minute like the Harugumo, and AA as strong as the best AA cruisers in the game. Who cares if your ship is that small - designers put guns on some that can take out battleships and more AA guns on them than cruisers that can take out planes as good as the strongest AA cruisers. These sort of game "design" decisions make the game a joke.
  2. SeigeTank2010

    Rage Against the CV

    You don’t need to park, you move around in that area. He was still getting kills and citadels. I was surprised he didn’t stay closer to carrier and maneuver there while still have plenty of targets There are many other ships that chew up planes, so you fight while closer to them. It’s not just carriers. Teamwork. To instead run away from cover, especially in THAT specific game knowing the carrier will come for you, then complain when he does is just either being stubborn and how “dare” someone punish me for playing poorly, or trying to set up an excuse to demand a nerf for carriers. Would you defend him for charging DDs with his BB around a hill and dying to it with ease, then demanding DDs have broken the game? I hope not. And he likewise for whatever reason seemed determined to make it so carrier would keep going after him. “Ichase is one of the very best players...” That doesn’t negate the fact that he did the opposite of what he knew he should and should not do. If he’s that good then it means he did it on purpose. Maybe he was just in a bad mood already (which he alluded to at start of video) and ended up making him stubborn. As one of the best players, it also wouldn’t make him right if he charges at DDs around hills in his BB, gets wiped with ease, then demand that DDs have broken the game. So be careful in assuming everything a person says must be right just because they’re one of the best.
  3. SeigeTank2010

    Rage Against the CV

    He “understands the mechanics well” yet watch the replay. When enemy carrier no longer attacked him because he got near stronger AA cover, what does he do? He immediately runs away from the cover then starts complaining the carrier goes back to attacking him. So he refused to use the game mechanics that he understands so well so he could complain after being punished for it. He may know the game mechanics but that just means he purposely violated them so he could rage against CVs. This while still being a terror to other ships getting a chunk of citadels and kills. Please tell me you wouldn’t defend him if he started charging at DDs around hills in his BB, got owned, then demand DDs have broke the game.
  4. SeigeTank2010

    Rage Against the CV

    Did I say that? No. You head away from the area while fighting instead of staying near him then complaining about his quick flight times. He won’t be following you with his carrier. And it’s very risky for carrier to get that close to a fight as once you’re spotted you’re toast. Staying still is risking death from DDs as well.
  5. SeigeTank2010

    Rage Against the CV

    So CVs get owned by some cruisers and are not as OP as some would claim. Interesting So if other ships stay closer to cruiser escorts instead of running away to make sure they’re easier targets they’d have far less to complain about. And even after getting several kills and many citadel hits, some people act like they’re “not able to play the game” if it’s a carrier returning the favor that game. Bottom line is people just want to be at the top of the food chain not having to play smart and now can’t stand the fact they have to actually think.
  6. SeigeTank2010

    Rage Against the CV

    He claimed there was nothing he could do while proving there was a couple things he could do and refused to do it so he could complain. . When he got near the allied carrier, the enemy carrier stopped attacking him. He could still fire at enemy ships from there. What does he do? He runs away from allied carrier knowing the enemy carrier will start attacking again, then complains that there’s “nothing he can do to stop it” when he does. Meanwhile he’s still killing others with his citadel hits. Oh the irony. Just another anti CV rant from a player who has no problem frustrating everyone else with all his kills and citadel hits, but then hates it when he refuses to play less aggressive and gets punished for it He even knew the enemy carrier was right behind the island near him but instead of heading away to increase his planes travel times, he stays there making sure it’s even easier for the carrier to hit him more often. Bottom line he made it easier for the enemy carrier in every way possible, made himself an easier target in every way possible, then expects carriers to be nerfed for punishing him for his refusal to take actions to counter it. He also pretends AA is useless, but then unwittingly proves AA is useful when he points out the player would drop part of his squadron every time so he “doesn’t lose all his planes”. So the AA WOULD make you lose all your planes after an attack. So much for the lie “AA is useless” And the devs listened to nonsense like this. Might as well charge at DDs in your BB, get killed with ease, the rages against DDs. Would be just as silly.
  7. SeigeTank2010

    Best CV complaint ever!!!

    It just shows how brainless most anti-CV whiners are. And also shows how powerful it is to spew non-stop hate towards something - others will hate it and will have no idea why they do when called out on it.
  8. SeigeTank2010

    When will Slingshot Drop Exploit be fixed?

    The issue is for some reason the planes speed up that aren't part of the drop. There's no way your planes would go anywhere near that far in the same time-frame if you didn't drop but kept flying. They need only adjust the speed of the planes that are not part of the drop, not mess with the invulnerability. Why should planes you are not controlling be wiped out while you're not able to control them?
  9. Yes, DDs would have stronger AA than older DDs, but it still wouldn't be as strong as an AA cruisers that have far more deck space and can fit far more of the best AA guns on their deck, which is the point people seem determined to ignore.
  10. Ah so you realize it would be just as [edited] to put artillery guns on some DDs that would be as strong as the strongest BBs. Well done. Yet you support something just as [edited] as putting AAs onto some DDs that are as strong as the strongest AA spec'd cruisers in the game. So you're not being consistent. Since when it's a destroyer's "identity" to fight airplanes with their AA as good as the best AA spec'd cruisers? Thank you for proving my point. It completely changes those few DD's identity into AA ships, which is what the strongest AA spec'd cruisers are for. The best AA cruisers in the game have far more space for far more AA guns and far bigger AA guns. To ignore this physical limitation and pretend a far smaller DD can carry just as many AA guns and just as big AA guns is just as much of a joke. But anti-CV whiners will pretend it's very different because they want a DD that's all but immune to carriers.
  11. Nascar is not two teams trying to win a match. Close team matches in any team sports/competitions are the most exciting. The snoozer in team sports/competitions are the ones where it's obvious in the first few minutes what the outcome is going to be. And we're also not talking about set teams and those set teams playing other set teams. Talking about random people coming together to form two random team for one match. In such cases, you split up the better players.
  12. If you think there's nothing wrong with giving some DDs artillery guns as strong as the strongest BBs in the game, then you have no intent of being honest on this topic. It's an outright joke that there are some DDs that have AA as strong as the strongest AA spec'd cruisers in the game. Of course some would like a kiddie game where DD's also have squads of planes, BB's artillary guns and CA's anti AA guns and a few nukes, but this is a game that's trying to at least make it seem realiistic while also sacrificing a tiny amount for the sake of gameplay and fun (which is why you don't see such garbage in this game, except for some DD's pretending to being able to fit just as many AA guns and just as large AA guns as the best cruisers in the game).
  13. Well when carriers are sailing across land, let us know. Meanwhile stop trying to demand what amounts to cars not being allowed to be driven on roads just because you refuse to stop walking in the middle of roads. You don't seem to realize carriers don't fly - they sail. You also seem to have forgotten the part where BB's can hit you from almost anywhere on the map. You also seem to have forgotten how DDs can attack and kill you while remaining invisible if they choose. Sorry it bothers you that carriers, which are ships, are in a ship game. If you hate it, then find another game rather than trying to force your hate on everyone else. Make your own ship game with just your favorite ship class and no others. Good luck with that.
  14. When you see 8 out of 10 matches over and over again where over half of one team knows about capping and only 1 or 2 of the other team knows about capping, that would not happen that often if teams were random. If teams were random, after tens of thousands of matches, you'd end up on weaker teams as often as stronger teams. You wouldn't instead have stronger teams 70+% of the time. Yet you continue to see teams stacked with players that have a clue and other team only given 1 or 2 players that have a clue. That's proof it's not random. This after thousands of matches - win %'s say it all. If every competitive match with random players forming the two teams, if the better players are split up between both teams (and likewise the not as strong players are split up), and you do that with a huge pool of players, different players each match, the % you win is going to be very close to 50% if they really did split up like that. If after thousands of matches some players are winning 70+% of the time, that's proof that the matches are not only not random (because even in random, you'd get stuck on weaker teams as often as you get stuck on stronger teams), but that there's something going on that's making sure more of the stronger players are being stacked onto the same team far more often, intentional or not.