Jump to content

SaltySeabiscuit

Beta Testers
  • Content Сount

    29
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    3987
  • Clan

    [BISC]

Community Reputation

21 Neutral

About SaltySeabiscuit

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. SaltySeabiscuit

    Thunderer; Money Conquers Morality

    After this? Probably wont for a while. Just didn't want to make a mention of it because of the inevitable "wont miss you lul" posts.
  2. SaltySeabiscuit

    Thunderer; Money Conquers Morality

    So because it wasn't the most optimal it wasn't worth having the choice? Interesting...
  3. SaltySeabiscuit

    Thunderer; Money Conquers Morality

    No, my complaint is they are removing pre-existing content so the new content looks different and "new" In a heartbeat, yes. The whole reason I ground the line was for the promise of a maneuverable ship with 18' Guns
  4. SaltySeabiscuit

    Thunderer; Money Conquers Morality

    Just because you cant directly buy it, doesn't mean its not a money grabbing move. Most players wont have a quarter of a million coal lying around, and as such will have to grind for said coal, resulting in more playtime. More playtime that Wargaming can indirectly monitize, through premium accounts, commander training, and other Doubloons based economic holes.
  5. There is no point trying to make this look pretty, so I wont. Wargaming, stop creating artificial division to sell other ships. People wouldn't care if both the Thunderer and the Conqueror had the 457MM guns, but instead, you decided to perform the lowest effort separation of ships I've ever seen. How low effort? See for yourself. Attached is an image of the ship description of "Conqueror" after Patch 0.8.8. For those who cant see the image, let me quote it directly. Apparently, the Design is so "notable" for the main guns, that Wargaming sees fit to remove them entirely from the ship, changing the entire playing style of the ship for anyone who preferred them, and already put the money and effort into getting and equipping them. This is pathetic, a change to the core of a ship is not something you shrug and refund the component for. This isn't removing a "b" hull on the Fuso. People have put their time AND money into this, even if the majority didn't; a change like this should provide the owner with the carrier style refund of the entire ship if wanted. Sure, many people wont care, but the fact you threw even SOME of the players under the bus for the sake of artificial scarcity and separation is utterly abhorrent. Good to know Money trumps Morality in Wargaming town, without any shred of doubt these days.
  6. For me, the whole reason I ground out the Conq is now gone, and all I get in return is a pathetic refund on the component for what is a major limiting of option for pre-existing owners of the ship. Were the guns meta? No, but I didn't even touch the 419MM's on my Conq, now the 457's are gone I would use an option of refunding the entire line, since, like as aforementioned, the entire reason I got the Conq, as a 18" ship that's more maneuverable then the Yamato Class, is gone.
  7. SaltySeabiscuit

    Update 0.8.0.2 Hotfix - UPDATED (11/2)

    No, ships without short range AA have been nerfed. their Mid range wont fire below 1KM range , as opposed to current behaviour of firing to 0.1KM
  8. SaltySeabiscuit

    Update 0.8.0.2 Hotfix - UPDATED (11/2)

    The Medium Range AA minimum change concerns me, as it basically shadow nerfs top tier British BB's, DD's, French BB's and CA's, for unknown reasons, especially considering things like the Lion (T9 BB) already get targeted by CV's for not having effective short range AA. 1KM doesn't sound like much on paper but especially with dive bombers it basically means that there is no chance to fight back against them on their dive.
  9. I can honestly see why this is a thing (it being t9 and in the prem shop) as it was originally a tier 8 from what I've heard, so chances are that no-one saw fit to change the marketing direction to a freexp ship and instead simply priced up the ship for equivalent scaling over tier 8. Good value? Well its better then buying required doubloons for a Freexp conversion of tier 9, and people have been doing that for a while. Good idea? Not really, but its understandable why its happened like this.
×