Jump to content

ZeroCoolant

Members
  • Content Сount

    24
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    2839
  • Clan

    [VAE]

Community Reputation

21 Neutral

About ZeroCoolant

  • Rank
    Seaman
  • Insignia
  1. ZeroCoolant

    Double CV games

    That would be very welcome and time-bound which at least means there is a counter play possible.
  2. ZeroCoolant

    Double CV games

    I'm not calling for a CV nerf. I'm hoping to discover (through conversation) some mechanic that would allow the script for the scenario above to be more interesting. As a straw-man proposal: should spotting work differently or should loiter time be restricted? The loiter time is specifically a problem in late-game. Early on a DD can smoke up and sit. The CV driver will go on to find other useful targets. In late game, smoke is not a defense at all. The CV driver can stay overhead indefinitely and the DD driver has no chance of escaping unseen or undamaged. Maybe each flight has a maximum flight time of two or three minutes and then it must return damaged or not back to the CV? Another idea: maybe there can be critical damage to an aircraft formation (e.g. flight leader shot down) that makes its attacks less precise or aborts them, forcing a go-around. Current system feels very locked in. A ship can have its rudder damaged, but a flight of planes is on rails until it ceases to exist.
  3. Recency bias here...but here it goes anyways. TL;DR; double-CV games end the same way for every player other than the CVs. By the time you get down to ~5 v ~5 with double CVs the other players might as well tab out and get something to eat. There are no believable plays to make and no counters to being found and focused. In the end it is down to luck and which CV pair is best that round. If you're not a CV in that situation you can mash the keys all you want, but the end is coming. This is made even worse at lower tiers where AA is not worth mentioning, and maneuvering for capital ships is a planned event. Some counter arguments I can imagine and here are my pre-canned responses. 1. Play CVs so that you can counter them. Answer: I will not play or allocate time to something I wish to see die. Any usage encourages WG to spend more time on CVs. I'd rather they see my idle Hosho and know that I did not enjoy being on either end of it. Also, Twitch and YouTube have plenty of content to study CV tactics. 2. Similar things can be said about other ship classes. Answer: There are known counters to other ship classes and adequate room to maneuver to at least hope of remaining undetected until the right moment. There is zero hope of remaining relevant and undetected against CVs. 3. You're an anti-CV troll, plz die, kthnxbye. Answer: I'm against any class where the only enjoyment is restricted to one side. I do not even enjoy hunting them down and seeing them disappear from the surface at the end of the game. I am simply tired and angry of dealing with something that is playing by completely different rules. The things are ammunition and fuel dumps...and they can't detonate? Can't even be bothered to run the detonation flag? Or maybe invest in the necessary upgrade? As you can see I have much sympathy for the plights of CVs in WoWs.
  4. ZeroCoolant

    Spotting and targeting

    I completely agree with this idea. A dispersion penalty would handle this quite well. Another idea could be that the spotter identify 2 or 3 team mates to whom their radio-room can send quality information, and those are affected less. Or have it as a cool-down driven ability and share some of the benefits of damage done when you're the "quality spotter" ship.
  5. ZeroCoolant

    Run a CV popularity experiment

    Dear sir, this is not trolling. If you're feeling anything but mild amusement, I urge you to reflect on the state of your mind and seek inner peace. Nothing worth getting excited about has been said here. We're having a polite conversation but happen to diametrically opposed views. Also I'm not following the "confession" angle. 1. This is not a court or legal proceeding. 2. If it were you're not an officer of it and I'm not a suspect. 3. "trollolololol" was my laughter at your absurd jump to conclusions and the need to attack the author rather than the idea.
  6. ZeroCoolant

    Run a CV popularity experiment

    Agreed. I know which option I'd choose. With other classes there actions _you_ can take to counter. Against CVs its not about you, its about them and their level.
  7. ZeroCoolant

    Run a CV popularity experiment

    Alt account trollolololol. Don't need an alt-account to be anti-CV. Its not controversial, or uncommon. Give it up? Don't think so. These forums exist for a reason, and if people are tired of hearing something over and over, its a sign that thing exists and is a problem. No one [edited] about the good things. But, it would be cool if when you purchased a premium you could vote for best / worst features in the game. Just so that the devs can hear your message as their receive the money.
  8. I recommend you run an experiment with game satisfaction: CVs removed and CVs in game. I've been playing for quite a while now and not one person in my clan enjoys either playing CVs or facing them. They do play them, and they do spend time and money grinding them...but no one I know likes them at all. Its basically a separate game outside of world of warships where every once in a while some damage arrives from a parallel universe.
  9. I agree that it should not be possible to do accidentally!
  10. Yeah, I've been experimenting with the different ships. It is a neat perspective IMO, it would be cool to be able to stroll the deck!
  11. Recently I've found myself enjoying the "float on top of your forward turrets" position. The sound of the water, the perspective of how fast 40 knots feel like are very cool. I think it would be really cool to add 5-10 crew positions per ship -- fixed observation points where your view can be anchored giving a "crewman" like experience/view. WDYT?
  12. ZeroCoolant

    Moar realism please

    Can you elaborate? I'm not familiar with these lines.
  13. ZeroCoolant

    Moar realism please

    It doesn't prevent me from thinking about how things might be better. Mistakes can be fixed. I'm not one for accepting them as irreversible.
  14. ZeroCoolant

    Moar realism please

    This misses the point by a large margin. I proposed an concept of "playable realism" and gave what an application of the concept might look like for the purpose of illustrating how it might be applied. As far as "the other half" goes -- I did explicitly say playable which should rule out a single class of ships dominating the game. It is easier to paint a person a selfish by and then fight off a ridiculous strawman proposal then to engage in a "what if" discussion. The idea was to start a conversation about how to improve WoWs, how to make it more immersive, how to give it adequate depth, etc.
  15. ZeroCoolant

    Moar realism please

    This would be going "full realism" which is not what I suggested. If you can see a playable way to make 30km radar work, I'd be interested in how it might work. In regard to search vs target: I'm not an expert but have enough knowledge to know the two are somewhat in opposition. In the case of WoWs that could be a "good thing"© as it allows the player to make intelligent trade-offs like situational awareness vs accuracy.
×