Jump to content

BarronRichthofen

Members
  • Content Сount

    302
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    12690
  • Clan

    [DRHS]

Community Reputation

125 Valued poster

1 Follower

About BarronRichthofen

  • Rank
    Master Chief Petty Officer
  • Insignia

Recent Profile Visitors

746 profile views
  1. BarronRichthofen

    Highest # of planes shot down in a match

    Well I dont have the full match end of game screen, I do have a personal one that's quite good. There was 123 527 AA Damage in the match as well. Thats what happens when 2 CV's focus a Neptune. Was kind of ugly, for them.
  2. This is why we don't get unlimited consumeables.
  3. BarronRichthofen

    Nelson, not so bad after all

    Hmmmm, so tanking 2.66 Million potential damage in a game is having "underwhelming" armor. Thats my top so far but I average 1.6 Million potential a Game. My Bismarck rarely tanks like that. You have to play the Nelson, not just a RN BB. I Do this bow tanking and by knowing when to go dark and heal to maximum effect. Daamage is easy in her, but playing her well is not.
  4. BarronRichthofen

    CVs, refunding CVs, etc...

    Well TBH I've only had one match so far where dual CV focused on me. I wasn't even in a DD. I was in my Fiji at the time. (token tier 7 in a Tier IX match with 2 T 8 cv's per side) NO DD's in the match so even in my Fiji I had the lowest AA. What pissed me off was the 98k damage to planes but only 4 shot down. I ended up alone and apart for most of my team running for my life for most of the match. But because the enemy CV's focused on me it cost them the match. It was one of the worst CV experiences I've had but not bad all things considered. There are some DD's that really need an AA buff (Shinonome and a 1 AA rating for example). IMO most DD's are fine, but I think if there was some form of anit loitering mechanic (more AA damage the longer a plane circles a DD for example) it would go a long way to easing the DD hate for CV's. IMO the fact that a CV can, and sometimes does, loiter over a DD with planes when they can't to anything to deter it is the bigest factor at this point. Most Gun DD's can prevent this (their AA is a little better) but the IJN Torp line is the worst at plane defense. Now that the furvor of CV's has died down some and were not seeing Dual CV's or worse every match it's looking like the hot fixes have toned down the CV quite a bit. In some cases a little too much. The MM system is what really hurts the CV's at this point. Tier VI CV's vs Tier VIII AA can be brutal for the CV. By the same token a Tier VIII CV is brutal to tier VI ships of all types. With the every other tier CV setup we have now a +/- 1 for them may be in order.
  5. BarronRichthofen

    DDs can Do Well in CV Games (Let the Down-votes Begin)

    I can think of 3 ships in my port I find "Fun" to play with CV's and only if the make the mistake of coming too close. My Dallas, Flint and Cleveland. Note All 3 are heavy AA ships, see a pattern here. Now I don't stop myself from playing DD's it's just become harder to get a game where a DD makes a difference anymore when a CV is present. Can't cap or spot much anymore, Getting a decent torp shot off is difficult even before CV rework, so some DD's like the Kagero,Yugumo are seriously limited in what they can do now. It really boils down to the ability to give a constant spot on DD's. It's not easy for the CV's to do this now but still an issue. Things have gotten better since the initial release of the CV rework, but IMO WG still has a ways to go before its balanced.
  6. I used your suggested Z-52 build and got torp reload down to 58.5 sec

    Thanks

    1. BarronRichthofen

      BarronRichthofen

      The Z-46 get's a little better reload than the 52 IIRC using the same build. I use it as my high tier german torp spammer.

    2. Klatuuu

      Klatuuu

      how do you think it will do in Clans

    3. BarronRichthofen

      BarronRichthofen

      I used my Z-52 in the last several seasons of clan Battles, She preforms well. Very good one on one vs other DD's. She can even win 2 vs 1 depending on the situation, ( dual shimi's I can take down, 1 of most other DD's and a shimi I usually win) 2 gearings I can usually get one b4 the 2nd gets me in clans. So I personally think she preforms very well in Clan Battles, I worry when I see another Z in clans thought because then it's all up to skill. I'm good in the Z but not the "Best" so I have to respect other Z captains in Clan battles.

  7. BarronRichthofen

    New Radar is a Buff to Radar Ships

    Ok @ Vaffu the concealment nerf all ships but DD's took happened a MONTH AGO. Riding a dead horse there buddy. On an Individual ship basis Some got buffed, some (like the CL's who got no range or duration) got nerfed. But TBH for most DD's these changes will mean little to nothing at all. Take the KM line, the changes didn't really help them any. Torps are so short ranged they have to get into radar range of russians and only have a .5 km range advantage with ONLY the Z-52. Other than that ONE ship in the line, to torp it has to be well within Radar range. The same goes for the American Line, the Gearing being the one that can torp without getting in radar range. It does have a much biger margin of error with the 16km torps though. IJN Line is the only line that it really beinfits they have 5 ships that can torp at equal or beyond radar range. As far as the cap contest, well lets be honest MOST good DD captains will tell their team to sit and spin if they even suggest an early cap on the DD's part.Why? Radar. Even with these new mechanics to radar it will not change that attitude on the DD captains part. Giving a DD 6 seconds to respond to being tagged with radar can in some cases allow that DD to survive. But in Most from my experience it only mean's I'll have more HP left in late game. I don't normally die to radar ambushes. I try to not even get into those situations in the first place, hence the 16.8 km gun range I run on my Z-52. I don't do caps any more even though the Z-52 is the best cap contester there is. Radar has made it not worth it. In the end the American CL's got a nerf, about even with their CA's and the Russians got a Buff. Not as big as most buff's to the russian line but still a Buff. The brit line, who take radar on one of those floating citadels??????
  8. BarronRichthofen

    Yeah I'm done with this....

    Nope thats the DD, but close your #2
  9. BarronRichthofen

    Daring and Z52 need a buff . Idea's ???

    Well I don't own the Darring so I can't commment on it. Now as far as the Z-52 goes for the most part she is fine, but........ with the radar changes comming she could use a little more torp range. Thats about it. I've always been annoyed with the german torps, the G7 torp had a historic 12km range vs the 10.5km we get thats not too bad. Where I have the main issue is the G7 torp had the heaviest warhead of any torp in WWII. Hence they should hit the hardest, but nope. Why? Balance I guess, or anti german bais? beats me.
  10. BarronRichthofen

    Update 0.8.0.3

    OK look opinions on these changes are going to vary depending on your perspective. CV's are going to hate them, DD will at the least like them. Some CA's (brit line) will be laughing with glee. Now I consider myself a DD main. IMO the CV's had a month of free regin on DD's. And no it wasn't the Damage from the Rockets it was the constant spotting that ruined DD play. I do not thnk that this adjustment to the spotting was the right way to go. Spotting only for the CV or only showing on the mini map IMO would have been better. But that takes longer to code. The blanket 20% was too much IMO. This was a quick fix to try and save DD play. It may have been too much. It may not. IMO changing CV spotting in a way that does not allow every ship on the enemy team to light up a DD that's been spotted is needed. The spotting change will have unintended concequences as hinted at by the mention of RN Cuiser line. IMO WG used a sledge hammer on this fix instead of the smaller ball peen hammer that was needed. THIS is coming from a DD main mind you and even I think WG went too far.
  11. BarronRichthofen

    Nelson!

    Nelson's zombie Heal = 28,000 hp (with flag) Just don't get citadeled you can't heal that.
  12. BarronRichthofen

    Forget the Ceasar How about fixing the ROON

    Exactly, 7.6km Secondaries with flag and module. 6KM ship and with Viligance skill 6km torp detection. If you dont care if your spotted you can even extend that torp detection to 7.2km with the target acquisition module, and duration to 2:30 sec with hydro module. Trust me your BB's will thank you when you cut off 1/4 to1/3 of the map from torp shots thanks to your Hydro. The key to the Roon is to play to her strenghts. She can bow tank (I've bow tanked 2.1 million in potential in ranked), She can burn them with HE, she can pummel anything with secondaries, She Can Citadel any but the Musashi at 10km in ranked. IFHE just makes her H.E. even MORE damaging than it already is. In ranked this season I have not lost a single match when I was in her ( Can't say the same for any of my DD's,BB's or other CA's). If you are having a hard time with her in ranked, play some randoms or co-op's to learn the ship, then go back and use what you have leaned OP.
  13. Looking at these stats it is clear that they ARE loosing players. There was a downward trend from 2016, It ticked up just before the Release of 0.8.0 (anticapation players) But since the releas the number of players and matches played has gone down. Argue all you like on the like or dislike of the CV Rework, but the numbers prove it was not taken well by the community at large, I've played some matches in Randoms, some in Ranked but the fun factor has disappaited some for me. In randoms because of the ever present CV's, and Ranked because of the deluge of DD's. What does that tell you Wargaming? let me answer that for you. Your rework is NOT going well. You've driven your die hard DD's to Ranked, because there are no CV's there. Your player base and number of matches played are decreasing. People are actually leaving the game if you go by the forum and reddit posts. I won't say your game is dying yet! But it seems to be cirling the drain, and you need to put a stopper in it. There are 3 modes of thought on this from the players, 1) Yank CV's altogether 2) Roll back to the old CV's 3) Quickly FIX the problems with CV's IMO I prefer the First option. Carriers are a Strategic weapon system. WoW's is a Tactical game. THAT is the problem with CV's and has always been the problem with CV's. Trying to fit the square peg in the round hole. You'd have better luck with putting Submarines in the game, at least they are a tactical weapon system. WG has spent countless hours on the problems with CV's pre rework, on the rework, and now it will continue post rework. IMO they are riding a dead horse with this one. It would have been better to just cut their losses a LONG time ago and realize that a Strategic ship wont work in a tactical game. But someone at WG has CV's as their fair haired golden child and wont let them die.
  14. BarronRichthofen

    CV still king

    CV's are a STRATEGIC weapon in a TACTICAL game. Because of this fact Wargaming will NEVER get them balanced.
  15. BarronRichthofen

    wg why sacrfice the 95% for the 5%

    IMO What it boils down to is Wargaming has decided they want a Strategic weapons system ( Carriers ) in a Tactical game. It's like having a guy with a Nuke that can hide on the edges of a map in Call of Duty, with a reload of 2 seconds, unlimited ammo and can't be affected by his own Nuke. It would Break that game and it does the same thing Here. How often is a CV among the first 8 players of a 12 player match killed? Rarely. How often is a CV the last man standing? Often. Which ship has the most potential to influence the match ? Carriers. Which ship has the greatest stand off range? Carriers. Which ship can get rewards for little to no risk (shot down planes with unlimited planes means NO RISK)? Carriers. I can go on and on with these, but it boils down to a Strategic weapon in a Tactical game. Yes Carriers were a ship used during WWII and they did have a great influence during that war. But look at the way carriers fought. Beyond the horizion, one all or nothing strike in the time frame allowed by this game (thats being generious), Limited planes, LONG turn around on strikes. Low hit rates (1 hit from an entire squadron) Yeah the one hit could cripple or Kill but there was not a constant barrage of planes attacking. Yeah WG's take on CV's make for an engaging game play for Carriers. But that is the problem here. What is engaging for the Carrier is in no way shape or form even close to reality. Yes all the ships in this game have had liberties taken by WG to make the game something that can be fun and engaging within that 20 min time frame. But carriers just do not fit in that time frame. WG wants them and they are going to make us have to deal with them, no matter how imbalanced they are. (IMO they will NEVER be able to balance them) Should they be in a tactical game? NO, they are a strategic weapon and have no business in a 20 min Tactical game. There is so much wrong with carriers, even the old system, that IMO they should just be pulled from the game, Square peg in a round hole here Wargaming, Yeah you can MAKE it fit with a big enough hammer, but what are you doing to the peg and the hole by doing so?
×