Jump to content

xEvilReeperx

Beta Testers
  • Content Сount

    39
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

  • Clan

    [TATER]

Community Reputation

23 Neutral

About xEvilReeperx

  • Rank
    Seaman
  • Insignia
    [TATER]

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. xEvilReeperx

    I Am So Tired Of the Stat Shamers

    If your stats indicate you don't actually know what you're talking about, you should avoid getting into arguments where they are relevant. Random unprompted stat-shaming isn't very common, but if you start or jump into an argument when you are clearly uninformed, it's not "stat-shaming" to point out that you aren't qualified to participate.
  2. xEvilReeperx

    Mejash's Video: Let's Talk about Steel

    This should already be the case then, no? There are 50%ers with Stalingrads. Stalingrad is hard to get because it's locked behind an absurdly massive grind for most people, not because it's a prestigious award that requires skill
  3. xEvilReeperx

    How To Counter The Stalingrad

    Eh, if your best way of killing a cruiser is to HE spam it to death at long range with specialized ships, it's overtuned. The fact that it has specifically increased vulnerability to fires as a balancing factor should, by itself, tell you that it has gained too many battleship advantages for it to be a cruiser
  4. There are some serious mental gymnastics going on in this thread, I love it. OP, you need to read your own supplied definition of the prisoner's dilemma more carefully. Once you've thought about it a while, maybe you will see how it works against you in this case
  5. xEvilReeperx

    The Stalingrad

    You're extremely naive if you believe this. Multiple ranked seasons at tier 10 is no mistake. Creating new resources (steel, copper, molyb) for playing competitively is explicitly designed to get people to play these modes. Why do you think this is? People need to grind through to the endgame, encouraging sales of premium, doubloons, premium ships People that play competitively are more likely to spend money, play in clans (= more game attachment) Encouraging more people to play competitively will therefore generate more revenue Design these rewards to be given out slowly, so that these above-average spenders will stick around longer Add a new carrot to continually move the goalposts (new camos for steel ships, new currencies for ranked and CW, more will be coming no doubt) to squeeze as much revenue out as long as possible before these people flame out So you're mistaken, it's absolutely a money grab. There's nothing inherently evil in it, but if you think WG just wants to reward its good players then I want to reward your well-reasoned thinking by selling you an EXCLUSIVE, UNIQUE bridge!
  6. xEvilReeperx

    The Stalingrad

    Or, of course, it will do the precise opposite. If you start from zero, you'll be forced to compete against players with special, objectively better ships for the better part of a year at minimum before you're competitive. Do you think that is healthy? Will that encourage people? Or will it frustrate them into quitting due to the grind? The game has a retention problem. Tier 5 was the first wall where WG discovered people do not enjoy grinding while at a disadvantage for long periods of time. There's a reason the XP and credit requirements for those ships was changed recently. Unique rewards are fine. Better rewards are not, especially when locked behind huge grinds
  7. xEvilReeperx

    Should capping be worth more xp now?

    I don't disagree on spotting, but in your case you actually dealt roughly average damage: about 1-ship kill's worth. Discounting the poorly-rewarded spotting damage, I think 1600 overall is fair for this. That would put you near the top of the average team most of the time even though your contribution in damage terms was essentially lighting 3 fires and landing a single torpedo that caused the bulk of your damage
  8. xEvilReeperx

    Should capping be worth more xp now?

    Capping is a multiplier to your XP total, but only if you win. Mediocre performance x no bonus because your team lost = mediocre xp average. This is why the gearing game posted above tops his team, but your game puts you in 4th. Fixed XP rewards just encouraged bots and bot-like humans to rush in, try to cap and die early.
  9. xEvilReeperx

    Stalengrad

    You've missed my point entirely. It was that "unique" ships are extremely difficult to balance, and WG has a history of botching the job. The rapid, drastic changes we're seeing to Stalingrad is strong evidence that they are struggling to balance it. I don't want there to be such a ship at TX, the competitive tier WG is pushing heavily, without there being a more accessible copy of the ship available to the masses. I would prefer it not be tier X at all, but I don't think that's a realistic option after all the hyping that has been done. ? I thought this was widely known? "Belfast is obviously a problem, that's why she is suspended for now. We're thinking what an how to do with her. And when. No details for now." (Sub_Octavian) Why is that? Heck, even you assume that WG's response to an OP premium was to release another OP premium. Is that the kind of balancing act you'd like to see at the endgame?
  10. xEvilReeperx

    Stalengrad

    Exactly and I think it's worth noting something. Really? Would you say this bow picture is mostly red or mostly blue? Yes, we should have total confidence in WG. They wouldn't make a unique ship that's hard to balance, right? I mean there was Belfast. But that was an accident and they had to stop selling it. There was the MK. Stopped selling it. Saipan. Kaga. Enterprise. Graf Zeppelin, that was definitely a screwup. GC. The Imperator Nikolai monster. Kamikaze and Fujin... There are definitely no signs of balance problems occurring with Stalingrad. They're sure to get it right. And if they don't, well all you have to do is grind for a year or so against those people that do have it, at a constant disadvantage if the ship turns out to be too good. That will definitely be healthy for competitive play, sure to entice more people into an already stagnant game mode. Nothing to worry about! Right? Warning: This post contains heavy sarcasm
  11. xEvilReeperx

    Stalengrad

    Is the Moskva a Tier 10, BB-caliber ship with improved bounce angles/fuse time and BB side and front armor? Or it a fragile, mostly 25mm-overmatchable-nose cruiser with giant exposed citadels and thin armor on its sides?
  12. xEvilReeperx

    Stalengrad

    If Stalingrad becomes a unique "must-have" ship for competitive play because it fulfills both cruiser and BB roles, then the competitive game will be harmed overall. They won't be able to put the genie back into the bottle. I'm concerned it'll poison T10 the way T7 ranked is poisoned by Belfast. It should, very emphatically, not be unique. Maybe they can come up with a variant of Alaska that's available for coal that'll perform in a similar role
  13. xEvilReeperx

    What key pieces of knowledge that the game does NOT share

    Yes. Evidence
×