Jump to content


Alpha Tester
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

  • Clan


Community Reputation

2 Neutral

About AdmiralKird

  • Rank
  • Insignia

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling


  • Position


Recent Profile Visitors

195 profile views
  1. USS Massachusetts.

    I was watching the stream, I think I saw the Massachusetts firing lasers for AA? The heck? This power creep is starting to get to me.
  2. I'm not really having any graphical or loading issues - the game loads up for me with 40 seconds remaining before the round starts and I get solid FPS throughout (except the occasion random hiccup). I could see commands not registering in previous patches if a random packet was lost being handed off to the server, but this feels more indicative of adjustments made to the control interface as far as a tightening of the latch/grab radius for fighter squadrons and clicking adjustments to general mouse controls. I've noticed on some streams frustration of players attempting to click on enemy bomber squadrons from surface vessels, so it might also exist there but I can't confirm it at all. Upon trying the alternative controls, they're working like normal 6.2 responsiveness - everything registers.
  3. I'm wondering if anyone has had this problem since the last patch. (I don't care that much about the Tier IV, V changes - please don't bring that into this thread). I mostly play High Tier CV's. Since the last patch I'm noticing a high percentage of my orders, whether it is a simple move command, or an attack command, simply aren't registering. I'm using the default control scheme that was present in previous version(s). My guess is it has to do with this new anti-pinging the map stuff they added to the game, but the controls overall feel like they have additional lag, as far as registering with the server, as well as simply not registering. Here are some Examples: I select Squadron 2, set it to move, I then select Squadron 3 with my number keys, and set a move order, but it does not register. I wait a second, set a move order, and it registers. If I try and frantically spam the move order, it won't register at all - no matter how many times I click - I have to wait. The same thing can happen if I have a bunch of planes in a group, I set some bombers to move, then grab my fighter squadron, tell it to move or attack, and it doesn't do anything. In addition, sometimes when I try and set attack orders for a fighter squadron, it doesn't want to grab onto whatever enemy fighter/bomber group is highlighted with my mouse. It will either not register, or it will end up setting a move command to that point, after about a wait of about half a second of server lag. It also tends to happen more frequently with carrier move commands, compounded by additional lack of orders registering when clicking on the minimap to set carrier move points. This is really problematic due to the number of squadron groups you have at the higher tiers and managing eight, nine squadrons, as well as your own carrier. You can't normally wait to set commands like you can with lower tier CVs, you have to set them fairly quickly or they're dead. In a game I just played, I had three groups of bombers up on the front line, and two fighter squadrons, with one enemy fighter squadron coming in. I first set the fighters to go after the enemy squadron, one registered, the other failed to register an attack order at all, I then waited a second, and got the second fighter squadron to move to the enemy squadron position (it wouldn't latch). After clicking again, it latched on successfully. Then I dragged to select the bombers to move them back out of harms way. But when I set the move command on the bombers, it didn't register. I had to wait a second. By the time I was able to get them to move, they were still within the strafe edge, and received a beating, losing 6/12 planes. My connection to the server is fine. I get 35ms connecting off the Chicago node. None of this was present in the previous patch. My guess is this isn't a bug, but a blowback from a feature with unforeseen consequences. It's overall quite detrimental to quick and high tier CV play. I haven't tried the new alternative controls, but as far as the old are concerned, it's not an improvement and is quite worse. I've played a lot of strategy games all the way back to the 56k days. I've played strategy games that took a lot of lag before a command registered on the net for a connection, but I don't think I've ever played a strategy game that outright ignored legitimate commands. Edit: Just noticed you can see this in ElvenRed's video that s/he posted in this comment here. The lag, because Wargaming games are server based, is always going to exist to some extent, but you can see when going from the carrier to the squadrons, commands towards the top of the map do not register at all.
  4. After playing a few rounds in the test, I'm not sure Tier 6 will be "the big barrier." It will likely be Tier V, because you see a whole bunch of Clevelands, Graf Spees, etc, and you can't manually drop on them so you're mostly done, especially for a new player who doesn't know to stay away from them because nothing in the game tells them those ships have mad AA, then they just see their planes evaporate round after round (and then get strafed by a Tier VI carrier in a multicarrier battle.) New players will think, "why should I put up with this garbage when I could just jump in a New York or Kongo and put lead into their sides?" The allure of CV's for me was learning in a game or two I could do manual drops (due to someone on TS telling me). "You know you can do manual drops, right?" "Huh?" "'Yeah if you press the alt key, you can set a much tighter torpedo spread." "Oh wow, yeah this is much better." And I played on until Tier 9 when I just felt it got kind of stupid with the AA level. I played about half way through my Essex before I gave up on playing. To me, there was no point to get a X because the game mechanics became... punishing? Versus how different it was a the lower tiers. It reduced the effectiveness of CV's, but it turned a new, decent player with 60% in Langely->Ranger like myself into a 44% 1/1/1 Lexington in 133 battles. There was nothing to help me understand how defensive fire consumables worked (because I didn't play cruisers), nothing to help me understand my circle diameter was expanding, nothing to teach me what ships had massive AA and which didn't, a Shokaku that could just wreck me.. There was no end game content, no reward for having a ten, it cost a lot of credits and XP, would just sit there, and wouldn't be as fun to play. So that's probably why you had a bunch of people going back to the lower tiers. Make high tier play more rewarding, introduce clan battles, have ranked, or a constant container 'super league' up at X, do something to get the seal clubbers out of the lower tiers. Add RNG dud torpedoes depending on the number of CV games played at the lower tiers. If you have played 50 Battles in a Langely, give the player 25% dud bombs and torpedoes, 100 battles, 50% dud bombs and torpedoes. Get the seal clubbers to leave by incentivizing them to play high tiers and negating their specific effectiveness at the lower tiers, but don't harm new players by reducing their ability to learn and be effective. With this patch, WG has done everything they can to harm new CV players, and nothing to really help them learn what they need to know. It would actually be better for me, as a new player, to get wrecked by a seal clubber so I could learn what was possible, and seek out that knowledge, because nothing in the game is telling you what is possible. Now you'll just get fighter strafed in a Tier V carrier by a tier VI carrier in a multiCV battle and have no idea what they just did, and no way of understanding how to do it, because your carrier cannot do that. So you fumble with the controls and are clueless and just give up.
  5. Warplanes improved 1.9

    I spent about a year and a half playing Warplanes every day. I haven't spent but about ten rounds in it in the past year. I played one session today and the bots play like they're from the top 5% of the playerbase during the game's peak.
  6. m3rc1l3ss, on 03 February 2013 - 08:43 PM, said: Did he just reply in haiku? Well inverted haiku but still O,o It was just a joke. I didn't really mean to, make Haikukachus. How do you know I am a he?
  7. tankwarhammer9000, on 03 February 2013 - 06:17 PM, said: Dont add negative rep again i could see people hating on some other forum user and telling his friends to -1 That person Deliberately Lowering his Rep. It doesn't work that way. This is the internet. No one has any friends.