Jump to content


  • Content Сount

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

  • Clan


Community Reputation

170 Valued poster

About harikari25

  • Rank
    Master Chief Petty Officer
  • Insignia

Recent Profile Visitors

680 profile views
  1. Are you using rudder (A and D) to make adjustments? They throw off your aim so that it doesn't match the reticle. If you calmly use your mouse (and only your mouse) to aim, you should be able to consistently land rockets, especially if you shoot across the length of the DD rather than coming in from the side. You also have to account for the travel time. The size of the reticle represents your potential dispersion, the tighter the better. With the best possible reticle, it should be relatively easy to hit DDs.
  2. harikari25

    Worst higher tier ship in the game?

    For balancing purposes, it would be silly to not compare apples to apples. The point was that you can't balance around server averages because those averages are not like for like; certain lines are disproportionately popular, so their overall stats suffer as a result. If you were to buff them based off of server stats, you'd end up with the most popular ships becoming pretty OP.
  3. harikari25

    Worst higher tier ship in the game?

    Nothing Dolphin said was controversial or confrontational. What is your 'perspective'? What ships at 9 and 10 are objectively weak or unplayable?
  4. harikari25

    Worst higher tier ship in the game?

    Wouldn't want to listen to someone better than you, you might accidentally learn something. The U.S. and IJN ships have diluted stats by virtue of being the most popular in the game. Even their top 5% stats are noticeably behind others. There aren't any genuinely unplayable T9 or T10 ships, the FDG and Izumo have been buffed enough that they clear that bar. The Khaba is probably in the worst shape in this meta unless it is played a very particular way. T8 and below is where you run into broken AF premiums, ships that are super miserable when uptiered, and inconsistencies within particular lines.
  5. There's a disproportionate amount of bad players clumped at T10 that never learned a thing about positioning. Cue facerolls.
  6. F2P games require a large captive audience to remain viable. It doesn't matter if someone is spending $1 a month or $100, they are needed by the game. A 'free' player that recruits a dozen friends is doing more for the game than someone that buys a T8 premium. If you only prioritize the needs of the paying 'adults' (there was nothing adult about your post), the game would end up a pretty lonely place as there'd be a small fraction of the existing playerbase left.
  7. harikari25

    If you could get rid of ONE map which one?

    WG keeps thinking that hard cover in the middle of a cap makes for a good cap. It rarely does. The right amount of hard cover near the cap, however, is important. Enough that you can use it to defend, but not so much that it limits pushes out or is unable to be flanked. Estuary is perfect because of this. You can push up on the cap in every type of ship and you can also defend, but neither is so easy that it becomes the default behavior. Trident is also like this. WG loves their one-way point of no return chokepoints. And they wonder why players play passively.
  8. harikari25

    If you could get rid of ONE map which one?

    Fault line is garbage and probably responsible for teaching people more bad habits than any other map. But I have to give this one to the reworked, completely unfun and irredeemable Islands of Ice.
  9. harikari25

    State of the Game: It's Wargaming Fault

    There would ideally be no irrevocable ranks. Ranked is supposed to be a test of skill, not endurance. You are the common denominator on every team you play with. If you put a little bit more thought into your play, you won't have to work as hard. Winning in ranked is not magic, it usually just requires not grinding mindlessly. It's a chore to have people on your team that do not care about the round result and view rank 1 as an inevitability instead of something that is earned with good teamplay. I am all for making the mountain steeper for those folks. There should be other ways to earn steel for 'free' so that players that don't do well in ranked aren't forced to play it for the rewards.
  10. harikari25

    State of the Game: It's Wargaming Fault

    Fewer irrevocable ranks make it easier for strong players to finish in fewer games. I enjoyed this past season a good bit more than previous ones as a result (along with arms race, which was fun and kept the game flowing). If you are playing 900 games and not ranking out, the system works.
  11. harikari25

    State of the Game: It's Wargaming Fault

    I just did a WG ingame survey on the rework. It would be way more effective to just make a thread and ask for feedback, or reach out to certain players. The vast majority of us want a balanced, fun game because that's what we want to play. I don't want CVs to be a bore or a chore to play, yet that's the direction things are trending.
  12. harikari25

    Lex Takes on Tier 10

    We had that and they nerfed it into the ground. The nerf was so hard that every other CV besides the Hak was caught in the crossfire. Lexington does just fine up tiered, provided there aren't a ton of 6.9km AA cruisers. There isn't a huge functional difference in AA between T8 and T10 in terms of AA that actually, actively discourages you beyond those AA bubble monsters.
  13. harikari25

    The real truth about your blowout losses

    Not sure where you get that impression. The team with the early DD advantage usually wins the game. A well-played DD can shut down an entire flank and make a push impossible.
  14. harikari25

    Please just remove stats from the game.

    It's the Dunning-Kruger effect. Players have one good round doing something really dumb and then are anchored around that idea, rather than objectively evaluating their overall play. You aren't going to convince someone that genuinely believes a round is a coin toss that their actions matter. A majority of players have no idea how good or bad they are because that information is obfuscated by the game. You have to consciously look for it, and if you have no frame of reference of what constitutes 'good' (or worse, believe the numbers are a lie or don't matter), it won't do any good anyway. The game should continue to work on improving the rewards for teamplay while punishing passive, noncontributing play.
  15. Nerfing premiums was completely off limits prior to this GC talk. The answer had been to simply not sell them anymore outside of crates. Devs and PR people can shout from the mountaintops that "well, no, we never explicitly said we'd never nerf premiums..." and it won't matter. It was clearly implied and was the basis for every transaction for a premium ship. Nobody wants to buy a ship that they feel is strong only to see it nerfed into the ground because a group of people are complaining about it. It is one thing to have a bad tech tree ship, it's another thing entirely to plunk down real cash for a digital good and have it suck (which is why WG has been keen to buff weak premiums). Ships like the Belfast, Kutuzov, GC etc... were all found to be OP in testing but WG ignored that feedback, likely as a way to generate sales, knowing full well a powerful ship sells better. You can't then suddenly pull the rug out from under people, pretending like you're suddenly all about the balance when for years that had not been the case. You can't be all about the money and then act shocked when people are upset you break this norm. This wouldn't be nearly as upsetting if WG had a good track record with balance and could be trusted to nerf and buff the right things, or had cared a great deal about balance previously. There's probably someone, somewhere at WG that realizes having objectively OP ships running around your game isn't good business in the long run because it frustrates players. Good on that person. They're a bit late to the party, but I wish them well. They would be wise, however, to take the path of least resistance here. The ships should be left alone, barred from competitive modes, and never sold again in any capacity. The new versions should be balanced and then sold. A minimal amount of value is destroyed with gains to overall game balance. Hell, call them 'legendary' ships and make them collectors items. You can't kill the enthusiasm for buying a premium ship and expect the game to live. This is one case where you cannot reach back into the past to right development wrongs. Just commit to releasing balanced ships from this day forward, starting with reworked premiums that had been previously mothballed.