Jump to content


  • Content Сount

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles


Community Reputation

264 Excellent

About JAKeller

  • Rank
  • Insignia

Profile Information

  • Location
    Virgo Supercluster

Recent Profile Visitors

1,494 profile views
  1. To each his own I guess. To the greater point is that many people in this very forum spent months working with Dmitri from WG and the Codeweavers team to stabilize the wrapper WoWs was running in. A wrapper I might add that was VERY unstable for over a year and chased off a large number of the Mac community, and the stable version we've only had about a year. (in fact less time than we spent helping you make it stable - it's one reason very few of us participated in the Puerto Rico event) Additionally, in the course of making the wrapper stable, a number of bugs were discovered and dealt with in the only executable for WoWs (the Windows version - remember the Mac 'version' only runs inside a VM). This is how you repay us for our loyalty. BTW, it's Mac, not MAC. MAC is a hardware address that uniquely identifies a particular machine, regardless of the network. I'm not trying to convince WG to keep us. That decision was already made by the accountants. I suppose I should thank you guys for one thing: I have way more time for the other games I enjoy. But I AM still angry.
  2. Aye, WoWs was only 1 of about 20 games I enjoy on my Mac. Seems counterintuitive to buy a Windows box for a single game. Not to mention the cost of switching all those other games over + all my productivity software, since I don't like the idea of having a machine (and not a cheap one at that) for a single game.
  3. A little bit of research shows that WG is losing money as they continue to hemorrhage players to other games. I suspect that some accountant decided that paying CodeWeavers to maintain the wrapper could be discontinued to save money and temporarily increase WG's profit margin. That meant pushing us out as WoWs will only run in the wrapper. (Since the wrapper is a Windows VM, any development costs are in the wrapper, which WG doesn't maintain; it's not WG facing difficulties in developing for Mac because they actually aren't. That line they fed to Hapa about costs is a red herring) Frankly, this is only a very short term bandaid for WG, and in the next 6-12 months, they're going to have to sluff off another section of players. What's next - they'll support NVidia and not AMD, even though a huge portion of their playerbase prefers AMD to NVidia? (especially in light of the recent over hyping of the newest NVidia cards) Truth is - since they're already losing money, throwing away players is not a winning longterm strategy.
  4. Bootcamp doesn't work very well. Macs and PCs have the same hardware structure, but Windows apparently doesn't like playing "Second Dog" on a machine. Frankly, the wrapper was most stable - not to mention that unless you have a more modern Mac (within the past 2-3 years), Bootcamp will not work with Mojave or Catalina. Some of us just can't afford to replace computers at the rate necessary to keep up with them.
  5. Just read Hapa's post. I won't use Bootcamp; ties up too many resources. The wrapper actually used resources more efficiently. Glad I didn't buy another month of premium then. @Hapa_Fodder - if MacOC interest is low, did it ever occur to you that WG has been trying to drive us away for the past 2 years? Did it ever occur to you that if you'd pushed WoWs as fervently for Mac as you did for PC that you might have a very large playerbase of Mac users? Unlikely, given everything WG has been doing to us for a while now. I suppose this should have occurred to us earlier since WG phased our Mac support for WoWP and seems to be phasing out Mac support for WoT. Well, I had been wanting to give my other games some love; I suppose you've made that possible now.
  6. Removed content. It's pointless to try to provide assistance to my fellow Mac players when we're being shoved out the door.
  7. JAKeller

    H-45 German battleship

    And given the time limits of battles in WoWs, its reload time would mean 1 maybe 2 shots in the battle. Besides, at that size, the only place it could effectively 'sail' would be to park near its spawn point. No sailing between any islands.
  8. True - how many people will swear that $19.95 is a bargain because it's under $20.
  9. JAKeller

    ST 0.9.10, Italian Battleships

    All RM guns were high velocity, meaning very flat trajectories. Cruisers tended to have guns combined in single carriages which made the have higher dispersion compared with similar guns of other nations, but the 2 should offset one another. What RM BBs (and CA/CLs for that matter) should have are higher than average service costs since while the guns had high velocities, they needed to be replaced fairly often.
  10. JAKeller

    Secondary gun movement

    There was always some animation in the towns. I'd just been hoping to see more with the setting turned on. You do have to get close enough to see any of it however. (with an appropriate LOD render setting)
  11. JAKeller

    Waterline: What Will Happen Next?

    I based it not on guesses but on the mathematical pattern they were following for the first 10 pts. You are correct that it's possible they use a table instead of a formula, but it's a lot easier to use a formula from a code perspective.
  12. Since I'm more a DD and Cruiser main, I won't be all that happy until we start seeing RM DDs available.
  13. JAKeller

    How to play Hōshō for the first time

    Frankly, set up a training room. Start with stationary ships that don't shoot, then stationary ships that do shoot, then moving ships that don't shoot, and finally moving ships that do shoot. This will teach you the basics of running squadron in a fairly safe manner.
  14. JAKeller

    Secondary gun movement

    Animates more than just the ship's secondaries. If you zoom in on islands, you'll find the trees swaying in some maps too. I had always wished that turning that on would've animated more stuff in the towns and villages, but it's very satisfying as it is.
  15. JAKeller

    Waterline: What Will Happen Next?

    Here you go. This was a quick spreadsheet I put together about 1.5 years ago to calculated expected XP for captains. I just added levels 20 and 21 to it. Hope This Helps. 20 Pt = 294,000 21 Pt = 329,000 Assuming they follow the existing pattern. WoWS Captain Level XP.xlsx