Jump to content


Beta Testers
  • Content Сount

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

  • Clan


Community Reputation

229 Valued poster


About DEWEY_96_

  • Rank
    Master Chief Petty Officer
  • Insignia

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. DEWEY_96_

    Tiny Tim and general rocket nerf

    Please remember forum rules- On topic, constructive, and remove political discussion stuff. We are talking about game mechanics here... everything else can be left alone. This is the "heads up" on this thread... if replies continue off topic or violating forum rules there may be further actions taken. Thanks all!
  2. That will be announced on the June 4th Stream that Hapa runs.
  3. DEWEY_96_

    Ain't No Zoup (a WOWS Parody)

    No need to be necro'ing old threads. Locked.
  4. DEWEY_96_

    Gouden Leeuw Live Test

    That's a valid question... and not violating NDA I can honestly answer "I don't know". I will have to play around with it and see. I will ask and get an answer.... but can't share it... SORRY ! (I almost feel trollish for posting that, but I wanted you to know you got me thinking enough to ask!)
  5. DEWEY_96_

    Gouden Leeuw Live Test

    So..... a couple things to remember.... (Transparency here- I do have access to ST ships... I don't think it's fair to post this without making that known...) 1- NDA- I know we all want a lot of info, but the testers just can't... 2- Be careful of sensational videos/pics/reports. 3- add up 2 and 1 from above- How many YT vids did we see before the NDA was tightened down where ships were portrayed as OP yet they haven't had that effect when released in game. One specific ship that comes to mind is Slava... this super Russian BB that can just snipe citadels at max range (per our initial impressions from CC's and whoever) . While it's a very capable ship, I just don't see that happening in game in it's final form. 4- Catch that last statement- FINAL FORM.... Ships get balanced and adjusted and tested over a bunch of iterations. Someone made the joke earlier about WG saying "but we need more stats to balance"... but that's super hard to do without seeing what they do on the normal server. If ST's get stuck trying to run it on a testing server or the PTS... you do run the risk of the ships being unbalanced beyond belief upon release. 5- Feedback doesn't just have to come from ST's. Please, leave CONSTRUCTIVE feedback on what you're seeing with ST ships with you run into them. Be patient...
  6. DEWEY_96_

    But...WG DIDN'T say that...

    I think the OP's point is, stop using absolutes, but I'm guessing and not in the OP's head and I hope he corrects me if I'm wrong. I mean, honestly, if we take "CV" out of that conversation and stick to "ship classes" in general... that conversation makes sense, right? When we're talking balance, doesn't popularity have to be part of the discussion? Look at the disappearance of cruisers after the skill rework... Deadeye had us seeing drops of 4-5 BB's and 4-5 DD's and maybe 2 CA/CL's. I honestly don't know if Deadeye was effective enough to cause that or if it was more just the threat of "super sniper" BB's that could delete cruisers at max ranges... and I'm not saying that Deadeye going away is due to the lack of cruisers... but won't it help bump those numbers back up? I'm not sure, I mean Deadeye is going away for more reasons than just a lack of cruisers... but it had to be part of the picture, didn't it? All based off the popularity of a class, right? And, while I don't know for sure (and if it is true, I don't know that I believe it) if WG is looking at CV's as another class to "balance" game play... then they'd want to increase the numbers so that "balance" they think would come from more ships of a class can fully get put into place. Again, I'm not agreeing or disagreeing... just trying to step back objectively and look at it.
  7. So... I pretty much agree with you- Except for maybe one or two occasions, I have yet to feel like CV gameplay "ruined" a game or threw a match one way or another. That's not to say I haven't seen games where a CV has deleted ships without blinking an eye either. I'm neither pro nor anti CV. CV's are a game mechanic that are not going away... and while it doesn't sit well with those who do not like CV's, I don't buy into the stance that they "ruin the game". Anyone who has been around since Alpha/Beta has seen the changes WG has thrown at us, and we've learned to adapt (or at least I've tried to) as I realize this will be an ever evolving game including reworks that will totally disappoint me... as well as welcome changes I'll be glad to see. Captain skill rework for example- I was actually glad to see the re-work as it made the game refreshing to me... although I was disappointed in some of the skill sets and changes that came (I loved me some secondary build BB's) HOWEVER I didn't let it ruin the game for me... I have attempted to learn and adapt. HOWEVER- There has to be an understanding that changes that majorly swing the meta will never be accepted well. RTS to current CV setup was a complete change in the game meta... and we have another one of those coming in subs whenever they arrive. Meta changes can, in ANY game, become a major point of contention with the player base as it very much is viewed as not "changing up the game" but instead viewed as "breaking the game". Especially when you go YEARS learning to deal with a meta and then have a huge curve ball thrown at it... So I do understand where the anti-CV crowd comes from... this meta change that came from the CV rework can easily be viewed as "game breaking" when you have lots of time and effort stored into a game and a play style only to have it totally taken away from you. My point was simply this- If you want to throw up that anti-CV stuff isn't what it's cracked up to be, you'll have to provide a lot more info... and it has to be on a fully unbiased and fair approach. I mean, I can play 100 games in my Halland, have 70 of them be CV games and claim to only be attacked in 10 of them so "CV OP" talk can be considered bunk... but that entire premise may change if you run 100 games in a stealth Shima or a secondary build BB where getting singled out by a CV is a death knell. Also, and more importantly, you have to look at it from outside your own player perspective. Take that example above... let's say I play a Somers for 100 games. In 70 of those games I see a CV and 50 of those games are T10 CV's. In 10 of those games I'm taken out by a CV. You can argue that dealing with CV's 10% of the time is pretty low numbers to want to complain about them... but what about the 30 other games where you couldn't use your ship to it's full potential due to CV spotting or you spent more time trying to avoid CV strikes then dealing damage to the enemy. Now 40% of your game play has been directly effected by CV's. And if you're the type that Somer's game play is your bread and butter... then now 40% of your play in that ship sucks... and that's a lot of time in a ship where you don't get to use it the way you want. Just because CV play doesn't negatively effect your game-play experience, it also doesn't mean that it isn't a total game-breaking experience from others. Again, I'm not anti-CV.... It's a game mechanic that, in my opinion, I will learn to deal with and adapt to... it's not going away, so no use getting upset about it... move on, figure out your next step, and keep playing. BUT--- I'm also not pro-CV as I totally can see how players who lose major parts of what they considered enjoyable game-play are now very upset over the problems CV cause them. I don't see the game-breaking aspect... but I'm also not in their shoes to understand how much it has or hasn't changed how they enjoy the game.
  8. I have to admit, 20 is actually a pretty small sample size... especially when you constrain it with just 2 ships. Also, some details are missing... you didn't say what tier CV's you were facing... if out of those 8 CV games in your Seattle, 5 of them were against T8 carriers, then there is a reason why you weren't attacked. I'd suggest trying your idea again, with 100-150 games and switching ships every 10 ships. Oh, and don't forget to include T4-5 games where CV's are much more prevalent. Also missing is whether or not you were teamed up with other ships in your Seattle (you do point that out in the BB games)... I mean, if you were sitting behind say a Halland that was screening for you, of course no CV captain is going to fly through Halland AA to attack a Seattle... Now, as suggested above, were you a Yamato with a Shimakze screening you... then I can see them coming through the Shima to get you.
  9. I'm sure that's a EULA violation and can result in legal action for sure. No offense, I'm not digging through EULA to find it, but I'd guess it is
  10. One of the other things missing from the RTS days were the guys who ran fighter setup CV's... and had the strafe mechanic down to a science.... I used to run the 3 fighter setup in a few of my American CV's RTS and spent more time defending and running my fighters around. Saipan was a monster at this considering it's high level fighters. I miss running CAP fighters off my CV's. Never got much XP from it as that wasn't what got you XP in the game, but it made your team fairly happy. I get there were attempts at this with skills in the captain tree... but 1. those skills are "meh" and 2. very little reward for putting into skills instead of the skills for your attack squadrons. Maybe give us an option or figure out a way to bring back "Anti-CV Strike" setups on CV's and make it worth the while to run that setup. But, alas, that's me just remembering having fun doing that in RTS days...
  11. DEWEY_96_

    Super Battleships

    Hey all, Remember to stay on the topic or at least in the same general area of the topic regarding Super-battleships. A few posts have been removed and edited due to getting too far off topic. Thanks in advance, Dewey
  12. DEWEY_96_

    Naval Battles

    Only thing with NB is I wish they'd get rid of the earned XP weeks... Damage and ribbons aren't affected by a bad team... but one bad weekend of teams and you can struggle to help your clan at all.
  13. DEWEY_96_

    What part of this would be fun for a new player?

    3 CV games won't happen anymore... I believe they removed it from MM even trying to do that a couple of patches back (maybe this past fall?) About the same time they started populating low tiers with bots on random games.
  14. DEWEY_96_

    What part of this would be fun for a new player?

    And the game has so many options to jump the tiers quickly. How many release events give you the opportunity to hit T4-6 in a new ship line just by opening a crate.
  15. DEWEY_96_

    What part of this would be fun for a new player?

    Kami R isn't a P2W ship... it was one you gained from an event (pearl one maybe where you chose a side and then could buy it with earned pearls?) The Guilio, however, is well known for it's OP status and the weeping sobs of owners when they were going to up tier her to T6 and nerf her. Part of the reason it's been removed from the shop. For sure, though, early life on a new WoWS player can be tough. I challenge anyone who thinks otherwise to try starting from tier 1 and don't use any gold or xp to jump tiers. And the Kami R is to T5 as what the Umikaze is to T2