Jump to content

torino2dc

Members
  • Content Сount

    66
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    25121
  • Clan

    [KSC]

Community Reputation

150 Valued poster

About torino2dc

  • Rank
    Petty Officer
  • Insignia

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. The TLDR of the OP was: 'the majority of players find nothing wrong with this game (because that's what I feel) and if you are frustrated you should get over it (because that's what I do).' No matter what part of life you're talking about, the "why are you complaining things are fine for me" position is both naïve and insulting. Especially coming from someone who hasn't really spent that much time on the game (2k battles on an open beta account). I didn't think that making a note of this fact was controversial, but apparently I struck a nerve. I hope that with ample counseling you are able to resolve your frustrations toward players who have invested more in the game than you have.
  2. Most of the time, people use the "I play for fun" excuse when they don't want to take responsibility for their own actions. If their personality is lovely enough to overcome this, then great. Otherwise divving will be doing neither of you a favor.
  3. Your entire post is so charmingly benighted, it's hard to know where to start. Perhaps with the fact that WoWS has a monopoly over its market segment. There simply is no substitute PvP naval combat arcade vehicle shooter that we could migrate to. And even if we were willing up to give up the theme of WW1-early Cold War naval combat (which is a big draw), I would contend that there isn't a near equivalent PvP shooter that has WoWS's combination of methodical positioning, projectile ballistics and consumable-based teamplay. In short: WoWS scratches an itch you can't really satisfy in any one other place. And make no mistake: it does this with breadth of content *and* mechanical depth. You can dedicate every free hour to the game and not run out of things to master. But as you try, you begin to see the same problems occuring over and over again. *Systemic issues*. The inevitable products of various game mechanics and player motivations interacting in the darwinistic petri dish that is PvP combat. Problems that are begging for solutions. After a few cycles of complaining and being ignored, resignation and/or cynicism begin to set in. We know nothing will really get fixed, and if it does you can be damn sure that WG will find a way to trip over their shoelaces in the process. So we vent, in places like reddit or the forum, so that we can maintain a semblance of sanity while we play the game we're stuck with. To be frank, the entire post sounded like a tourist review: "Honestly the majority of visitors find [third world country] to be clean and well maintained. Sometimes the beggars annoy me a bit, other times they just ignore me and I continue my stroll on the hotel beach." Great for you. But you don't live here. And telling those of us who live/breath this game and its community how we ought to see things is kinda silly.
  4. From the article, no deranking until end of season (where everyone deranks!) Please note: if you qualify for the next league, you won't be able return to the previous one until the end of the season. So if you get to Gold then you still de-rank? (Because there isn't a higher league to qualify for)
  5. One question that I wasn't able to find an answer to: is there a process for de-ranking? If so, what does it look like? If not, what will happen to all those players who fail their way upward into a league they can't sustainably compete in?
  6. Far and away the best run-and-gun DD at T10 is the Kleber. IMHO there is no point playing a Khab in that style anymore. Therefore my recommendation would be to run Smoke Khab -- use the mobility to get into advantageous positions and farm from smoke.
  7. The whole reason this started was that you prefaced your comments by saying "I don't need hapa or any PDFs coming my way." The most reasonable way to interpret this is 'I don't want to face any sanctions for expressing my strong opinions (like this other guy did).' Except that is a complete mischaracterization of what happened. The other guy's sanctions were prompted by public calls to have a player killed and/or sterilized based on cognitive disorder; a position he doubled down on when told that he was way out of line. Only after that did other problems related to the tournament also came into the spot light. He was not sanctioned for 'having a strong opinion'. All of this was circulated in the aforementioned PDF, and the person in question never contested its veracity. After a lot of needless drama, the parties involved sat down and he apologized. Maybe all of this is new to you. Maybe, despite being a prominent, well-informed member of a prominent clan that was involved in the whole affair, you didn't know what was in the PDF. Then why refence the PDF in the first place??? Why say: "many people are forced to apologize for things that they don't need to because of cancel culture." And when challenged, why double down? Because you want to be able to say mean things and not face the consequences. You didn't have to go after Ahskance personally in your comment, you could have calmly deconstructed his argument and left it at that. But no, you couldn't resist those juicy personal jabs about how he isn't super-unicum in surface classes and therefore his opinion is bunk. You couldn't resist reminding us that you're super purple in everything and therefore your knowledgetm is by definition more valuable. And if anyone confronts you, you cry "cAnCeL CuLtuRE" as if that is a meaningful defense. It's a persecution complex held by those who can't separate 'having an opinion' and 'being a jerk to people'.
  8. I was giving you a second chance to distance yourself from pretty inexcusable comments. Good to know where you stand.
  9. It almost sounds like you think the comments in question didn't require an apology. Noted.
  10. I mean, the screenshots were part of the original document and the person in question publicly apologized for them. Not sure why we're trying to pretend like it might not have happened.
  11. Easy fix: don't publicly call for someone's death and then double down on it when told that saying stuff like that is way not okay.
  12. torino2dc

    ST 0.10.0 Captain Skill Rework: Feedback

    Most of the names we're used to will remain. The reason they're different in the above graphic is because the devblog spreadsheet translated them directly from Russian.
  13. Edit: Since these charts were first posted, WG released an updated table of the captain skills. I have left the old charts at the bottom of the post for comparison purposes. Apologies for the confusion. ---- As the topic of the captain skill rework is back in the headlines, I would like to offer feedback on the new skill trees. I am not concerned with the individual balance of the skills (though there is likely much to be tweaked), I am instead concerned with the overall layout of the trees and how the skills are distributed for each 'category' of a ships performance. In order to make the distribution easier to read, I assigned various colors to each category. -Destroyers- Feedback: - The main critique of this tree is that the individual lines do not follow a logical progression. E.g. if a player sees torpedo skills for levels 1-3, then it would make sense for the level 4 skill to also be torpedo focused. - The top end of the skill tree is dominated by damage and vision control skills. While these are obviously valuable, it would be nice to see a 4pt. Consumables or Torpedo skill. -Cruisers- Feedback: - Once again, the individual lines do not follow a logical progression. - There are very many skills that focus on damage dealing, either through shell upgrades or main battery or torpedo upgrades. The high end of the skill tree features no powerful bonuses for Consumables or Survivability. - The overall trend of this tree is to push cruisers away from their role as a support class and towards pure damage output. This is in my opinion, not a healthy direction to push cruisers in. - EDIT: the addition of Last Stand is very welcome. -Battleships- Feedback: - Although this tree is perhaps the most mature of the four, it is still frustrating that each category of skills is not carried to its conclusion. e.g. a 4pt. anti-aircraft skill would be very logical and welcome. - Given the enormous shells that battleships fire, the shell quality upgrades feel insignificant. Pyrotechnist, Threshing and Armor Piercing don't accomplish much. In exchange, we could consider low cost skills to boost other aspects of the BBs role. -Aircraft Carriers- Feedback: - The addition of several skills to boost combat air patrol (fighters) is certainly a welcome one. - A large number of skills seem to be aimed at boosting plane speed. I'm not sure if so much of a focus is the correct approach. - The main concern is that there aren't many skills that boost the abilities of the CV hull itself. This limits the CV to only the abilities of the airplanes, which limits the possibilities of the player. CV players should be encouraged to use their hulls in a team-oriented manner. -Overall- The captain skill rework shows some promise, but it is held back by an overall lack of top-level cohesion. There should be a logical and balanced distribution of skills to boost different aspects of a ship's performance, and there should be an easily understandable increase in potency as the player moves from one level to the next. I hope by color coding the skills in this manner, we can see areas where too many skills exist, and others where we could urgently need new ones. ---- Version 1 (old) Skill trees:
  14. https://na.wows-numbers.com/player/1003410816,STINKWEED_/ Your last 21 days worth of battles disprove your assertion, lots of red there. You're losing games because you're not playing well. No conspiracy theory needed.
  15. torino2dc

    Shall we organize Player Strike?

    I love how the opinions of two CCs are somehow taken as gospel -- and somehow now the basis of a strike. 1. Flamu has such a massive hatred against CVs that he will hideously contort the facts to suit his worldview. Maybe if he actually played CVs he would understand how things look like from their perspective, but no, that would risk destroying the narrative that he feeds to his fanbois and for which his fanbois richly reward him. 2. Jingles is a lovely old weaver of tales, but his take on the ARP Yamato was just completely off. WG has always invited beginners to fail in high tier matches, at least since the release of the Salem if not before. ARP Yamato with 24 battles vs. a Thunderer with 1k battles at max. T6 is a difference in degree, not kind. If anything, the fact that the ARP Yamato player got a better score than four of his teammates proves that high tier matches are already infested with bad players who've failed their way upwards with tech-tree ships.
×