Jump to content

Brohk

Beta Testers
  • Content Сount

    1,868
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    8476
  • Clan

    [SOV]

Community Reputation

702 Excellent

2 Followers

About Brohk

  • Rank
    Lieutenant
  • Insignia

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

1,838 profile views
  1. Anyone remember back before the container system, those "daily" missions we used to get? You know, "Shoot down 30 planes; Reward - 35,000 credits" and available once every 36 hours? We've come a loooooooooooooong way!
  2. I agree with this, because I could gather two other players of my same skill level (WR/PR/etc.) and we wouldn't be able to pull off the 85-90% win rate that these players are pulling down. I've watched the streams for this division and between the constant communication, strong decisions and high skill level, I'm not surprised by the results.
  3. Let's see, you bring up the argument you claim to despise so much and effortlessly crusade against in a thread where it wasn't present, using a gross oversimplification of the issues and broad generalizations to paint the anti-CV crowd. No wonder this wasn't received well.
  4. Brohk

    The invasion

    You should edit the original post. Weebs can be very touchy when it comes to poking fun. Believe me, I know.
  5. Brohk

    Stricter punishment for AFK

    I understand this and that's why I don't think one AFK should warrant beheading or a permanent ban, but after multiple transgressions the penalty should get stiffer. Having said that, if people routinely have trouble loading in then that raises two issues. 1. Why continue to do so at the cost of your teammates. 2. Wargaming should do something more to help alleviate the issue.
  6. Brohk

    Stricter punishment for AFK

    I doubt WG would ever increase the penalty for going AFK in Ranked battles, but I'd be all for it, or at least progressively increased penalties for repeat offenders. Four of my first seven games in ranked had AFK players, three on my team and one on the opponents team. All four were losses. Since then, I've only played a few (three maybe?) games and I just can't be bothered anymore. I'm no unicum so I can't reliably carry dead weight on top of teammate mistakes, not that I can do that consistently either. The steel would be nice, but I'll likely just stick to Ranked Sprint going forward, unless I 'git gudder'.
  7. Brohk

    Russian carriers are coming!

    Don't worry, WG will balance everything out by introducing a new premium ship; the USS Ronald Reagan. For only $499!
  8. Brohk

    CV ai in co-op cheating???

    There's a lot to digest here. Bots in co-op essentially have cheats enabled in order to give them even a miniscule chance of winning and since the average win-rate for a bot is probably hovering around 2-5%, I'd argue they aren't even effective. Moreover, the only thing more pathetic than co-op bots win rate is the aim of bot CVs and their inability to dodge flak. I'm pretty sure bot CVs couldn't successfully rocket strike an island, and I'd bet money you took no damage from that flight or any flight thereafter. No lie, I've never had a DD struck by rockets in co-op, ever. The bots always miss, and badly. I'd also wager you shot down most, if not all of that flight. Why would Wargaming need to address this? Finally... Bruh. It's co-op. I play some games there myself on occasion and the last thing they need to do is make bots even easier to farm.
  9. Brohk

    What if we brought back controllable fighters for CVs?

    There was one, and only one time a CV successfully cross-dropped me in the RTS days and mind you, that was when most of my games were played. It was a Hak player who used all three TB squadrons to pull off a perfect trap I couldn't dodge out of in my Benson. I was sunk in the first few minutes of the match and I was absolutely awestruck because that had never happened before, and never happened again. @Ducky_shot is correct, pulling off a successful cross drop required a skilled CV player (or an oblivious DD player...).
  10. Depends on how much you have to spend, I like using my ECXP to retrain captains (190k for 19 point-er). However, you are correct, it can do that as well.
  11. The real benefit is actually captain re-training. You can move captains that need to re-train for the ship they are assigned to a premium ship and not have to worry about captain skills only working at 50% effectiveness. I think FXP is fine currently, and any addition to how much people earn on average just means inflation.
  12. Brohk

    Public apology, and I'm done for now.

    I'm the same way, I either stick to co-op or free xp my way to tier 7-8. As for CV's, I refuse to play the tier 4 CVs in Random battles anymore because I don't want to be the scumbag ruining some new players fun.
  13. Brohk

    HMS Lion: Underwhelming and Perplexing

    It's role is to soak Free XP so you can get to the Conkek. At least, that was my impression. I'm also curious to know how the hell to HMS Lion, but after finishing that grind I have no intention of resetting that line - ever.
  14. Brohk

    The Hypocrasy of Campers

    I mean, it actually is the job of the DD to spot, cap and range ahead of the BBs and CAs. Doing that job however has become increasingly more difficult. Also, tale as old as time my friend, I remember griping about this in the beta.
  15. The concealment change might have a positive effect for destroyers, but this feels like Wargaming is fishing for an easy solution to a complex problem. Some of my destroyers would honestly be better off jettisoning the AA mounts overboard once this change goes through because I'll never want to turn it on. Granted, I'm already reluctant to do so in some destroyers anyway because the AA damage is pathetic (Hello Asashio!) so it's not actually going to change much of anything anyway. I just wish WG would address the underlying problems because all this change does is give credibility to the fact that AA on some destroyers is hopelessly terrible and should never be used, and future DD lines are going to either get a pointless AA suite that you turn off and leave off or they get the new power creep AA that you actually want to use.
×