Jump to content

InspGadgt

Supertester
  • Content Сount

    874
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    5152
  • Clan

    [808]

Community Reputation

82 Good

About InspGadgt

  • Rank
    Ensign
  • Insignia

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. InspGadgt

    "Waiting for Authorization"

    I did...but given that it is the 2 hops right before the server...to me this looks more like an edge network router issue on WG's network.
  2. InspGadgt

    "Waiting for Authorization"

    Pinging login1.worldofwarshiops.com yields a different server address than what is listed for the NA server. I get an IP of 162.213.60.65...running a ping plot to that IP also has a similar packet loss issue as shown below:
  3. InspGadgt

    "Waiting for Authorization"

    Well looking at the ping plots it looks to me like this is another Telia issue...Note that WG's server for NA is in Illinois and the packet loss appears to be happening in Chicago. This leads me to believe that the issue is at the edge network for War Gaming. I remember similar issues in the past with Telia...WG claimed to have moved off of Telia's servers but a simple DNS lookup revealed that what happened was that Telia had changed names but the routers were still the same. This was back when WG had 2 NA servers. Now that they have reduced to 1 I can't say for certain it is still Telia...but the symptoms are the same. Of course it has been long enough now where the former Telia routers have updated their DNS names to whoever took over so there's no way now to say for certain the issue is the same. At any rate the issue appears to be on the Cox network which is NOT part of the Charter network...though I do have a ticket open with Spectrum for the issue so hopefully they can properly escalate it ISP to ISP to resolve the issue.
  4. InspGadgt

    "Waiting for Authorization"

    I'm seeing a packet loss near WG's server in Chicago. The last responding router on ping plotter is a Cox router in Chicago.
  5. All of this was true before the CV rework as well...The loudest complainers know this already but they just want CVs out of the game.
  6. InspGadgt

    CVs Nerfed Into The Ground

    It happened to me several times...not just the once. I consider myself a CV main but play BBs the most because grouping with a CV in the past was always a problem. I also play DDs quite a bit so I know what it is like from their side as well.
  7. InspGadgt

    CVs Nerfed Into The Ground

    I was getting 6 to 8 rocket hits and only doing about 1000 damage. I should have been doing a lot more based on what I've seen watching some of the youtube videos.
  8. InspGadgt

    CVs Nerfed Into The Ground

    I think we agree on this more than you realize...I can see where a CV singling out a DD for rocket attack combined with attacks from other ships on a constant basis would be a problem. I think the only difference is in I didn't see CVs by themselves doing all that much damage to DDs. Now when combined with fire from other ships definitely. But by themselves no. Personally I really didn't go after DDs other than to spot them...my main target was always BBs. You don't get the big damage numbers going after DDs. Now I only played a few games after the latest patch before I quit playing...enough to know CV game play was pretty much ruined. But it could be game play was ruined even more than I thought so that now the only real viable target for CVs are DDs because the AA to attack anything else is just too strong. In that case then again that is treating the symptom and not the problem. Rather than nerfing CV attacks against DDs they should address the AA problem so that CVs have more valid targets to attack. That would take the pressure off of DDs. Combine that with one of the spotting suggestions mentioned earlier and now even allied ships to the CV are going to be attacking DDs less from the CV's spotting.
  9. InspGadgt

    CVs Nerfed Into The Ground

    Personally I was not seeing much damage at all from rockets even when I would get a good hit. The vast majority of the time I could not kill a DD on my own with a CV. Realize that most people who are showing replays on Youtube are not your average player...they tend to be more at the top of the food chain so they are not a good indicator of balance. Though to be honest this doesn't bug me as much as the spotting. I'm fine with having to ask for help with a pesky DD that manages to get through. What really gets me is the AA and spotting issues. These have been a problem since before the rework and did not get fixed in the rework. The problem with spotting from the planes side is that even before the rework there were certain cruisers that could spot and start shooting down planes before the planes could see them. This is just ludicrous...it got worse in the rework and is about to get worse again when they reduce plane spotting by another 20%. There have been many good suggestions on how to deal with this from making spotted DDs only visible to the CV to having friendly ships needing to be within a certain range of the planes in order to see what the planes are seeing. As for AA that is a MM problem. Far too often one side will have god mode AA while the other has next to nothing...or entire games will have god mode AA or next to nothing...These games are what make the really high and low damage numbers CVs do. Which is why you often see a CV either do tons of damage or do next to none. Until they find a way to have more consistent AA from game to game then they will never truly get the kind of data needed to properly balance CVs.
  10. InspGadgt

    CVs Nerfed Into The Ground

    Oh I'm not blaming DDs...I'm blaming WG's response to DDs on something that really wasn't a problem, in the case of damage, and really was a problem, in the case of spotting, that could have been handled with a better game mechanic.
  11. InspGadgt

    What was old is new again...

    The only reason arty and CVs were toxic and divisive is because of crybabies who were either unable to adapt or unwilling to adapt their game play style to the situation. They knew going into both games that those classes existed and that they would have to deal with them. If they didn't like it going in they shouldn't have started in the first place. Personally I never had an issue with either...they are just another part of a multi-faceted game. Survival rate is a poor stat to use. The nature of a CV can't be changed. It is going to be in the back no matter what. Whereas a DD may or may not. A lot of DDs play the game poorly and get themselves spotted either by aircraft or by radar. The nature of a CV makes it so that there is no way to make it a workable class and not have it in the back areas. There were far better suggestions on how to fix things that WG decided not to use. Instead we get this silliness that is cruisers spotting and shooting down squadrons of airplanes before the airplanes can even see the cruiser. That's just stupid.
  12. InspGadgt

    CVs Nerfed Into The Ground

    They've had more than their stink taken out of the tail...They've lost their tail, all but 1 leg, and have only 1 eye left as well. They could have easily fixed the spotting issue with DDs with other means...as for their effectiveness against DDs...that was just [edited]. Sure they could hit DDs with rockets but would do almost no damage to them.
  13. InspGadgt

    CVs Nerfed Into The Ground

    It's not a challenge when half of your squadron is shot down by ships your planes can't even see. It is stupid that ships can see planes before planes can see ships. There were other ways to fix this problem that would have worked better. As for the rest of game play for CVs...that really isn't a challenge either...With the exception of the AA cruisers that have god level AA, RNG totally dictates how many planes you will still have alive to drop bombs with.
  14. InspGadgt

    Update 0.8.0.3

    Midway's torps do not need a reduction in damage. They rarely hit as it is. Even with the aiming at it's most narrow the torpedo spread pattern for a Midway TB is so wide you can drive a Yamato between torpedoes while being perpendicular to their drop direction. Let alone if the Yamato is an aware player and tries to dodge...which he/she will do quite easily. These don't need their damage reduced. On my few games I get that don't have so much AA that I can't get a drop to hit...only about 10% of overall damage comes from torps. The vast majority comes rockets and dive bombs. As for the changes to aiming...DDs were not getting wiped off the map in mass by CVs so there is no need to make it harder to hit them. As it is/was...typically you would get 1 DD to sneak around or break through to the back and start chasing the CV. This chase would last the rest of the game because the CV's capability to kill the DD is pretty much non-existant. Sure we could do damage with rockets but not near enough to kill the DD unless he/she was playing stupidly. So it typically ends up with this long chase because the DD can't get close enough to running CV to kill it and the CV can't kill the DD and becomes useless to the rest of the team. Now for the really big issue...20% reduction in planes ability to spot ships...THIS IS FREAKING RIDICULOUS! There are already cruisers who can spot and start firing AA at airplane squadrons BEFORE the planes can spot them...not to mention all the ships that can magically spot and shoot at airplanes while the ship is completely enveloped in smoke. This is the WRONG WAY TO FIX THE SPOTTING PROBLEM. It is absolutely stupid that a huge ship on the open water can see tiny planes in the sky long before the planes can see a huge ship. There are much better ways to solve this problem. You could make it so that the ships the planes spot are only visible to the CV...or only visible to friendly ships within a certain range of the planes...or (as was suggested on Facebook, sorry I forgot who said it to credit them the idea) make it so that the planes only spot ships so they show up on the mini map but not rendered on the screen unless the ship is within range to spot the ship on it's own. Basically you are trying to solve a problem by treating the symptoms...The problem isn't CVs doing too much damage...or AA not doing enough. The problem is RANDOMNESS...Randomness in 2 aspects: 1) First and foremost it is the randomness in putting ships in a match. Some games you will have hardly any AA ships and CVs are going to have a high damage match. Or in others you have so much AA ships in the game that the CV is completely stopped from being able to perform it's duties. However all the complainers ever remember is the games with low AA and they got destroyed. They never notice the games where AA is so high that the CV can do very little. And those games happen a lot more than low AA games. As long as you keep having a completely random MM you can't fix this issue...all the tweaking you do to AA is either going to make CVs unplayable or run roughshod over the enemy team. Sure this randomness affects other classes as well like cruisers getting blown out of the water quickly in matches with a lot of BBs or BBs dying to torpedo blankets so thick you can walk across them in games with too many DDs. But this randomness effects CVs far more than any other class so you see much more wild swings between good games and bad ones. And secondly 2) The RNG in AA itself...I have had games where a single BB that has terrible AA wipe out entire squadrons of bombers with no other ships near by...and games where I can get 3 drops on that same isolated BB and only lose 1 or 2 planes. Until WG finds a way to reduce randomness or finds a good way to mitigate it...this has always been and will always be the main problem when trying to balance CVs. We already saw a large drop in the number of players queued up to play CVs after the last patch. With the direction WG has been going nerfing CVs as often as they are...we are going to see the CV population drop back down to what it was before the CV rework in a short period of time...if not even lower. Please slow down the pace of these changes so there is more time to actually evaluate their effects...and come up with some better alternatives. I was quite enjoying the new style of play with CVs even though I hadn't been able to do as well in them as before...But I see that enjoyment coming to a rapid end soon.
  15. InspGadgt

    CV's suck so bad now

    And it's even stronger now since 8.1...
×