Jump to content

exilicus

Members
  • Content Сount

    62
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    6151
  • Clan

    [AGSG]

Community Reputation

56 Good

About exilicus

  • Rank
    Petty Officer
  • Insignia

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. I already uninstalled last week. Not exclusively because of the new cruisers also the state of the game in general. My clan had 50 people in it who all played regularly, I was one of the last people playing but I am done at least for a while. But with submarines coming and these new cruisers, ehhh I think I made the right choice.
  2. exilicus

    Why I will be taking a break

    Not more CV's necessarily, but like every other class either have one in every game or get them out of the game entirely. Having a ship fully kitted for AA to get no CV is not very fun. Even if WG has to put a bot CV in the game to keep AA relevant. Or tie all the AA Skills/Equipment to other things, maybe combine them with secondary skills and equipment. What is the point of having all these AA skills and equipment when 50% of the time there is no CV? I don't get it.
  3. exilicus

    Why I will be taking a break

    Honestly I have no idea what you are trying to say. I respect you seem to have a different opinion, but frankly I can not understand whatever point you are trying to make. Agree to disagree and I wish you well. As an aside your jab at law enforcement is tasteless and unnecessary.
  4. exilicus

    Why I will be taking a break

    If you think the player base all gravitating to the same ships and avoiding others has nothing to do with balance then I guess we just disagree. Your point on MM I don’t understand at all. Yes the MM is limited to the ships in que. The que could be longer, it could have cv bots at all tiers. Yes it’s not all the MM fault, but the MM in WOWS is not a strength.
  5. exilicus

    Why I will be taking a break

    1.) I didn't say "cheated" I said "mislead" which they do often. 2.) No, if you spec secondary's they can shoot at something, the MM may not be Ideal but they are still useable. Spec for AA and get no CV and your build simply does not function, there is nothing to shoot at. While if you spec secondary and the battle stays long range it does suck, it doesn't remove your ability to use secondary batteries. The equivalent would be if you spec secondary battery and only fought planes. Your comparison is apples to oranges. 3.) How do you deal with a Thunderer in a GK? Also my main point was not one ship is stronger than another but rather there are quite a few ships that are not being sailed very much anymore for one reason or another and perhaps that should be evaluated.
  6. exilicus

    Why I will be taking a break

    In reference to your first 2 points, yes I agree with you sort of. CV's as a mechanic have expanded to other ships, which is great. However, not really related to what I said. I am frustrated because there is not always a CV in the game, which punishes players who specialize their ships to fight CV's, this is a direct result of the MM, which means the MM is the problem I have no idea what your 3rd point is in reference to. Are you referencing something I said? I was talking about ships that seem not to be played very often, if you feel power creep has benefited CV's and BB's then that is cool I guess, but not really relevant I think?
  7. First, my clan that I played with for 3 years has all stopped playing. 50 members of which only 2 of use have logged in the last 6 months. My friend and I ended up leaving and forming our own clan since everyone else is gone now. However, that got me thinking; where did everyone go? Why did they leave? Am I having fun anymore? My conclusion was to take a break from the game, and for what it's worth I wanted to offer my feedback as an average player, who spends money on the game, and has played for a long time. So why am I taking a break? 1.) General Sleaze - This is a hard one because there are so many examples. Over the years the community has dealt with rigged containers, dockyard shenanigans, denied refunds, DMCA abuse, questionable advertising, and on, and on. Honestly this could be its own topic. Everything with WG requires reading the fine print, scouring the forums, double checking the policies, fighting with support, and requires massive outrage in order to have common decency. This Kong 'voice over' is the latest example of what I call 'general sleaze' behavior, and I am just tired of it. I want to get what I pay for, I want you to stand by your commitments, I want you to give me a refund if I am not satisfied without needing an internet wide protest and uproar. I am happy to give WG money, at least I used to be. I just want you to stand behind what you are selling, be honest about what your selling, and treat us like you don't hate us. We are your customers, you shouldn't be trying to trick us or mislead us into spending money. Sadly this isn't just a one off this is standard operating procedure at WG. About every 6 months there is something new being sold that is blatantly misleading and it needs to stop. 2.) Matchmaking - This is not going to be a rant about balancing matchmaking with regards to player skill. I am very frustrated with MM as it pertains to CV's. Please make a decision either have a CV in every game, or get rid of them. It is insane to have AA equipment, AA commander skills, and AA cooldowns, to select all of this as your loadout and then not get a CV for 3 games. This happens all the time and it is extremely frustrating, and borders on inept design. Why should I be punished for speccing AA? I swear every time I load my ship for AA the CV pool dries up, but at soon as I decide to try my secondary GK or my Khab, CV's for days. Should I spec AA? Should I not? I have no idea anymore because I never know if I will face a CV or not. This is the only class in the game, except for very rare instances, where this is the case. 3.) Balance - I don't really care as much about which ship is the best, or what is meta, I care about having choices. I want to have a reason to sail my ships, I want them each to feel fun and enjoyable. I look at my port at ships like GK, Montanna, Khab and I never want to sail them anymore. I just simply have better ships, that objectively perform better. I can still have good games in these boats but am I the only person who feels like a lot of the older ships have just been completely left behind? Why? Why can't we go back and bring these guys up? Same problem with commander skills after this latest rework. BB's are down to basically one build now, swift in silence is just going to make that problem worse. Who is testing this? What BB captain at WG things SIS is a skill worthy of 4 points? I just feel like the game is becoming more linear with every update, less and less choice, everyone is being funneled toward the same ships and the same builds. Colombo just released and I barely see this ship in my games. But I see 3-4 Thunders, Shimakazes, Hallands, Petros, in every game. Does anyone see the Goliath? Ever? Does anyone see the Khab anymore? I certainly don't. This is not ok. I understand that any ship can be good in the right players hands, and I embrace that philosophy, but at some point when certain ships are just not being sailed by anyone, and certain commander skills are not being used by anyone, isn't it time to do something? That said, I am going to get some air. With subs on the horizon, the newly implemented AH mechanic, and Dutch air drops looming, now seems like as good a time as any for a little break. I hope the trend of the game changes a bit, I hope WG changes a bit, and I really hope that my friends that used to play this game start coming back and I can have fun again. I also hope that the folks out there more articulate than myself can persuade WG over time and get this thing turned the right direction. Thanks for the read and good luck captains!
  8. exilicus

    Use caution giving money to WG

    Please be constructive. Thank you.
  9. exilicus

    Use caution giving money to WG

    The word you're looking for is moral. I appreciate your feedback, thank you.
  10. exilicus

    Use caution giving money to WG

    I’m not blaming anyone. I linked a direct quote from the in game description on how CV refunds work. I hope everyone will form their own opinions on what is fair or not. Again, “if” you read I accept a large amount of responsibility for not following up on the website. However, ultimately my feeling was the in game description of the refund process is misleading (because it is).
  11. exilicus

    Use caution giving money to WG

    Sarcasm and genrally being rude is not constructive. While I respect your differing opinion, I find your statement offensive. As an english teacher in a foreign country, yes sometimes reading comprehension is hard. This is especially true when releasing a product in multiple countries. For many that you would quickly insult English is often their second, or third language. I would be curious how many languages you speak? With that said I am going to bet you have read very little , or none of the various constructive post from users in this thread. However, please enlighten us with your superhuman reading comprehension how do you interpret this: "If you don't like the new gameplay or would like to research the entire carrier branch from the beginning up to Tier X once again, YOU CAN EXCHANGE ANY AVAILABLE RESEARCHABLE AIRCRAFT CARRIERS FOR CREDITS AND FREE XP" As that is what it says in the game. Now, from their if you’re going to say we should have followed up and checked the website. That would be fair critism, to which I have already acknowledged multiple times.
  12. exilicus

    Use caution giving money to WG

    Well, I don’t know. If just one person reads this thread and can make a more informed purchasing decison then I feel pretty good. Nothing I can do about WG, or their customer servie policies. I just want others, who don’t know better, to get a glimpse of what I experienced so they can form their own opinions. WG seems pretty stalwart, and based on replies on this thread this isn’t a new attitude.
  13. exilicus

    Use caution giving money to WG

    I don’t know. Honestly, the replies from WG support seemed like they really couldn’t care less. As I said, they seem to acknowledge that what is indicated in game differs from the website. They didn’t dispute any of what I said, they just didn’t seem to care.
  14. exilicus

    Use caution giving money to WG

    Sorry to hear that, I hope you have more luck than I did with their support team. There are way more people than I thought who had this happen. They still haven't changed the in game message. I sent them this in game screen, over and over, they didn't really care. Good luck to you though.
  15. exilicus

    Use caution giving money to WG

    While I appreciate your position, however I think you're missing my point. Spending money to FXP is a mechanic of the game. I also Never asked for sympathy. As for the refund, my point was, there is a section in game, under inventory, that says "Carriers" it was specially designed to allow players who were unsatisfied with CV game play to recover their investment. So when you say "you expect a refund", the answer is "yes", not out of some sense of entitlement, but because that is what it says in the game. This is the quote from that page. ---What it says in game--- "If you don't like the new gameplay or would like to research the entire carrier branch from the beginning up to Tier X once again, YOU CAN EXCHANGE ANY AVAILABLE RESEARCHABLE AIRCRAFT CARRIERS FOR CREDITS AND FREE XP" ---What it says on the website--- "Please notice that you can receive Free XP compensation only once and only for Aircraft Carriers researched prior to Update 0.8.0 release." One of these things is not like the other. That was my point. Feel free to disagree, however please try to add something constructive.
×