Jump to content

ruar

Members
  • Content Сount

    936
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    1347

Community Reputation

539 Excellent

About ruar

  • Rank
    Ensign
  • Insignia

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. It's far below last year same time and about the same as 2017. This is when 2017s rise started though while it doesn't appear this year is climbing yet.
  2. https://stats.wotapi.ru/stats/wows/na/total Looking at the server population it is clear the downward trend is still continuing. How much longer do we wait before we can say the population took a permanent hit? I've been wondering if the slew of events has propped up the population and the regular summer drop is actually worse than the numbers indicate. Is there normally this many events happening over a 3-4 month period? Would it be safe to say that if the numbers don't start trending up in the next month we are looking at the new normal? Two weeks? Just noticed the move to misc instead of general game discussion. Sensitive topic there mods? @Radar_X
  3. I agree for the most part. Most FF is accidental. What I don't like is when someone intentionally steers into your fire. Yesterday in co-op had a BB manage to eat a torp that had been in the water over a minute and fired in a direction the BB wasn't traveling. He turned and caught the torp on purpose. I assume because he was upset I killed an enemy ship instead of him. Wasn't the first time I've had someone steer for torps in co-op. The limited number of targets makes it frustrating for slower firing ships to keep up so they retaliate however they can.
  4. I don't have an Atlanta but I can tell you it's the one ship I truly hate to see on the enemy team. Having short range isn't that much of a hindrance when nearly every fight forces you to enter into specific areas and chokepoints. Oh noes... 11km range is horrible. Except there's some kind of terrain within 11km of most every strategic point on the maps. And honestly, it's not the damage that concerns. Proper angling can help while trying to get the necessary angle to root the Atlanta out from the island it's behind. No, the problem is the fires. The constant stream of fires that can't be mitigated. You just have to hope you can avoid some of the shots, block with terrain, and close the distance before you burn to the waterline. Oh, don't get too close though because of torps. The problem with the Atlanta is that it's an AA boat in a game designed so that AA boats aren't able to do their jobs. So the AA boats have been given a secondary role of fire ship and that causes all kinds of issues. I'm glad to see the chance of being set of fire reduced. I think the game should be more about aiming, positioning, and doing direct damage. Being slowly whittled to death with DOT damage isn't very fun. Ships should be designed so they don't have to rely on DOT damage but it's just small portion of their overall damage. Similar to secondary fire from a BB is just a small portion of their overall performance.
  5. What is the best way to get 10pt captains? Purchase them from shop even if not specialized for the ship type you want use them in? Get 3pts and then free exp the rest? 5pts... 0pts? Some other method? I picked up the USA Alabama since I used to spend weekends on her when I was a kid but there was no captain. Not sure best way to get her ready for battle.
  6. You aren't paying for pixels though, you are paying for access. WG owns the pixels and simply sells the ability to use what they built. To use your example of software. You bought a license that provides features. Those features change and evolve with the software. You don't own the program with the license, just the ability to access the programs functions.
  7. But it's not his opinion. It's the opinion of the IP owner who has the right to make changes according to the agreement you signed, a contract in a way. So why can't the group who owns the property make changes? Your cash simply provides access to the IP and even that can be revoked anytime. You don't actually own anything. The only reason to not make changes is fear of losing sales.
  8. Except New Coke tasted bad, I was there. They probably could have pulled it off with a different introduction scheme, but it was either take what they gave or walk away. People walked away. The lesson is not that you can't try new things but rather to make sure that there are options when possible. There are ways to make balance changes to premiums and still provide options so people don't feel they are being cheated.
  9. I think the problem is WG hasn't defined what is untouchable and what is changeable when it comes to premiums. If they would tell us the which parts of the sell won't be altered then we know what is being purchased. Are we buying a "country, type, tier, theme", "country, type, tier, theme, stats", or is it just "country, type"? By being clear on what is considered changeable and what is locked then player expectations can be managed. Right now some players are like "I bought a 10 second rate of fire and if that ever changes then it's bait and switch". If WG made that a 9.5 sec9nd rate of fire then the same player is happy even though they no longer have what they purchased.
  10. The data I'm talking about showed a recent increase not one from the rework time frame.
  11. Anyone else notice that BB battle efficiency took a jump up on WG's graph for the CV rework? I didn't check the timing to see if it's due to the Russian ships, but it sure seems like an interesting coincidence.
  12. Are you really trying to play this out by picking and choosing items that support your cause but ignore 90+ percent of the rest of the situations in the game? Are you going to play stupid and try to say that a ship doesn't have to expose itself to return fire every time it takes a shot? Sure, there are times no one is in position to return fire but that doesn't change the fact ships have to take the risk they could lose health when shooting at someone else. All the while carriers are able to sit completely out of range of everyone and take absolutely no risk to their health pool. CVs are unique. Rockets and bombs are unique to planes an no other unit in the game has them. Yes, planes have torps but the way they are launched, the range they are launched, and the accuracy rating of those torps are all unique to CVs. The truth is planes have a different mechanic than ships and this is what creates all of the issues with balance and inclusion in the game. The fact you want to argue against this truth shows you have an agenda that doesn't include balance or compatibility. And with that I'm done discussing with you because we've circled back around to yet another series of posts where you continue to disregard the truth of the situation. That and I'm trying to not talk about CVs as much so I won't continue. Not that it matters because you'll just keep trotting out the same tired points that have been shown to be wrong over and over.
  13. You dismiss having 4-7 times the speed of other units as if it's no big deal. That speed combine with maneuverability is why CVs can't be balanced. Then there is also doing damage to ships without having to risk return fire. Even ships sitting behind an island can be counter fired but CVs can strike where no one is able to return fire. It's rather dishonest of you to act like CVs are just like everyone else except faster.
  14. You act like the people playing CVs are a significant portion of the player base. They are used in less than 5% of matches.
  15. If WG isnt going to make the changes necessary to actually have CVs fit into the game then having them essentially removed is the only option for most players. One problem though is you think people complain as a low key attempt for removal. What if people complain because they honestly don't enjoy matches with CVs in them? What if people just want to enjoy the game and CVs prevent that from happening?
×