Jump to content

Assisted_Suicide

Members
  • Content Сount

    61
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

  • Clan

    [CIAO]

Community Reputation

35 Neutral

About Assisted_Suicide

Recent Profile Visitors

724 profile views
  1. Assisted_Suicide

    Fubuki Shirakami and Marine Houshou Take Command

    So tell me please: If a person doesn't speak fluent Japanese, how then is it that the voice overs for these captains could possibly make any more sense than Cap's voice over? Cap's voice over is not meant to make sense and communicates situations via the use of notable tonal inflections and therefore is not annoying in that context, whereas the voice overs for these captains ARE meant to make sense and yet to anyone who does not speak Japanese they are more annoying because they make absolutely no sense; because imho there is a severe lack of tonal inflections in these voice overs. I speak some Turkish, Korean, Spanish, and German and know what tonal inflections sound like in many languages. But I speak absolutely no Japanese and it all sounds like monotone gibberish to me no matter what is being said.
  2. Assisted_Suicide

    Fubuki Shirakami and Marine Houshou Take Command

    Cap is so much more entertaining! I can't understand him either, but I like listening to him. He's a Cap'n Keeper! These two can be fed to the sharks for all I care.
  3. Assisted_Suicide

    Daily Shipments

    Premium time doesn't affect the daily shipments; but it seems some players feel the few seconds spent collecting them immediately instead of going in to battle sooner might somehow significantly impact their remaining premium time. This is the only conclusion I can come to regarding also trying to figure out what they meant by "Useful with Premium Time"
  4. Assisted_Suicide

    WOWS -Profanity filter

    @Crucis " Does anyone know the difference between 'then' and 'than'? It's "better THAN", not "better then". "Than" is a comparative word!!! And it's "if this happens, THEN that happens". "Then" is a temporal word!!! " It's better then is also correct when used in the context referring to a better point in time as in It was better then, but please note that the use of the contraction it's in this context means it was, not it is; and yes you are correct. Most people still use the wrong word.
  5. Assisted_Suicide

    Co Op was RUINED! >>>PLUS A SUGGESTED FIX <<<

    I don't like the current result and have play tested my proposed fix in training rooms and RATHER LIKE IT, AS DID THOSE WHO PLAY TESTED IT WITH ME!!! AND PLEASE NOTE THAT I ASKED YOU A QUESTION SPECIFICALLY WHICH YOU TOTALLY IGNORED IN YOUR MEANINGLESS REBUTTAL! and yes, due to the length of the question with it's defining clauses, I did in fact forget to use a question mark.
  6. Assisted_Suicide

    Co Op was RUINED! >>>PLUS A SUGGESTED FIX <<<

    And just HOW exactly would my proposed fix make Co Op any less of a learning center when in fact, if implemented, my proposed changes will make Co Op even more of a learning center by influencing disassociated players to play more as a team!
  7. Assisted_Suicide

    Co Op was RUINED! >>>PLUS A SUGGESTED FIX <<<

    BTW... Most players hate having to deal with CVs, and because the new 9v9 matchmaking without any game balance has literally castrated CVs and made them practically useless for gaining XP in Co Op for allied players, and almost totally useless for bot teams because the match ends with ships still in play and bot CVs never capture zones even if they could easily do so to prevent a loss; the presence of the CVs is of no consequence either way. StallingForTime was my previous player name. Under the new 9v9 Co Op matchmaking, battles like this ( https://youtu.be/bVCbiM19-Ds ) are a thing of the past!
  8. Assisted_Suicide

    Co Op was RUINED! >>>PLUS A SUGGESTED FIX <<<

    The increased starting point reccommedation has nothing to do with the size of the map and everything to do with the number of ships on the map.
  9. Assisted_Suicide

    Unsporting Conduct - Allied Aircraft Destroyed

    It is VERY possible! AA is an area effect defensive weapon. Flak, just like torpedoes, cannot distinguish between friend or foe and hits or misses accordingly.
  10. Assisted_Suicide

    Co Op was RUINED! >>>PLUS A SUGGESTED FIX <<<

    I am well aware of the Training Rooms and I did in fact set up a Training Room for members of my clan to specifically play test my proposed 6v10 format with all bots moving, armed, and AI levels set to high with the enemy team compliment built as stated, and I assure you IT WORKS! Even with one ship AFK on the second test we still won, but it wasn't easy.
  11. While I personally do not mind the change in Co Op Match Making from 8v8 to 9v9; I definitely mind the fact that the battles now end far too quickly as compared to their former average duration in the 8v8 format. Here is the exact reason for the problem: In the 8v8 format both teams started with 300 points. In the 9v9 format, both teams STILL start with 300 points. In the 9v9 format there is a more dense dispersion of each team's ships across the map which means that it is far more difficult for either team to capture zones because the threat and actuality of capture resets is far greater. Human players can compensate for this and still successfully capture zones. The capture of zones is critical to the earning of points to compensate for ship losses during battle. As you are well aware, there are three ways to achieve victory: 1. Destroy all enemy ships. 2. Reach 1000 points through the successful capture and uncontested control of zones. 3 Drive the opposing team's points negative through the continued destruction of their ships. NUMBER THREE IS THE PROBLEM WITH THE NEW 9V9 FORMAT!!! The team rosters were increased by 12.5%, but the starting points were never adjusted at all! Because this starting value has not been adjusted for the 9v9 format, far too many battles are finished in under 5 minutes and that makes for very frustrated players. especially when Matchmaker places them all by their lonesome on the map and very few bots head in their direction and their ship is too slow to get to the bots nearer the rest of their allies. I HAVE HAD BATTLES IN THE 9V9 FORMAT (MOUNTAIN RIDGE IN PARTICULAR) WHERE I SPAWNED NORTH OF A AND ALL THE BOTS WENT B & C AND I WAS NEVER WAS ABLE TO GET IN MAIN BATTERY RANGE AND FIRE A SINGLE SALVO BEFORE THE REST OF MY TEAM DROVE THE POINTS NEGATIVE OR ON OTHER OCCURRENCES NEVER BE ABLE TO CAPTURE A BEFORE THE BATTLE ENDED!!! Under the 8v8 format; 300 starting points accounts for roughly 60 points for each of the ships comprising roughly 2/3 of the team in the 8v8 format or 5 ships of 8 appraised at 60 points each ( 5 x 60 = 300 ) To compensate for the larger teams; roughly 2/3 of the team in the 9v9 format should also be valued at approximately 60 points each to obtain a more functional starting point value for battles - or... Since the math is extremely simplified... 2/3 of 9 is 6... and the adjusted starting points should be very close to this! ( 6 X 60 ) or 360 starting points. A 360 point starting total for each team is about as simple a place for WG to start with without much difficulty and WG won't even acknowledge that it's even worth a try to alleviate the current situation. At least 360 would be a huge step in the right direction; maybe 380, or 400, or 420 might work better than 360 because 300 is undeniably too low a starting number! The new "Independent zone" EPICENTER starts at 450pts per team. Why? Why was the need felt to raise the 300 point start to 450 there, but no thought given to raise any other starting values to 450? 300 is too low a starting point value for the new 9v9 Co Op format. That fact is irrefutable! >>>>> The following is not so much of a continuation of the problems with the 9v9 format as it is a VERY PROMINENT SUGGESTION as to how to make Co Op battles truly a cooperative: Change the format from a max queue of 30 seconds where unfilled slots will be filled with bots, to the following: 1.SIX human players needed in queue regardless of ship type to initiate a server side battle loading sequence. 2. No max queue time 3. The format will be 6v10 where it will always be 6 real players verses 10 bots consisting of 1 each of every players ship selected for battle regardless of types and numbers, PLUS 1 random CV (even if it means the bot team has 2 CV), 1 random BB, 1 random Cruiser, and 1 random DD 4. Random Map 5. Random Battle Mode Since this format will always place the all human team against 66% greater enemy numbers; it will force the ally team to truly cooperate to overcome the enemy forces. This will also force players to think twice about simply rushing in and being focus fired by the greater enemy numbers and possibly triggering a cascade of ship losses leading to a Co Op loss if they do rush in. This will also remove the problem of ally bots simply doing the unwanted suicide ram kill because there will be no bots on the ally team with this format. This will also significantly reduce human players from suicide ram killing because that is the worst thing you can do when your team has the lesser ship count. This will also increase the hit point pool for farming damage from which is the only reason I can think of as to why WG raised the Co Op team rosters to 9v9 to begin with, because considering the total lack of follow through in ensuring that everything balanced out properly after switching to the 9v9 format; a greater hp pool for farming damage from is the only thing that makes any possible sense as being the reason for the change. This will also raise the difficulty level of Co Op without any adjustment to the bot AI and totally get rid of the current 9v9 fiasco's problem of ending so fast and being so boring. PLEA TO WARGAMING! Please do something FOR your player base for once to actually make the game much more interesting. Thank you! PLEA TO YOU! This suggestion needs your support to garner the attention from the developers. Thank you!
  12. You make A LOT of presumptions based solely on ignorance! I do look at the map and I am aware of where our ships are and also aware of the fact of WHO turned tail as soon as I spot more than one enemy and fully aware of the fact that if I hide in smoke I can no longer spot for my team!!! I'm just tired of my allies knowing they can turn full broadside to the enemy while they make their immediate escape because they know my DD is the ship that is going to be focus fired IF I AM PLAYING A DD!!! And ESPECIALLY WHEN THEY HIT THE "SUPPORT THAT TARGET" ( my DD ) and I reply "Thank you" only to find out there is ZERO SUPPORT when I spot for them. I also next to never hit the ""REQUESTING SUPPORT" or any other F key for that matter!!!! And here is where you truly did comment out of ignorance!!! BECAUSE I PLAY ONE HANDED AFTER HAVING SURVIVED A MASSIVE STROKE IN AUG 2015 AND FOR ME TO HIT ANY KEYS ON THE KEYBOARD IT MEANS I HAVE TO LET GO OF THE MOUSE TO DO SO AND THAT IS PRETTY MUCH SUICIDE IN THIS GAME!!! And nowhere did I state or insinuate that I only play DD in ranked!!! What I stated was that the current scoring system is totally committed to rewarding whoever scored the most XP regardless of anything anyone else did to support the team; and in that contextual sense, needs an overhaul to be more fair to everybody. STAY ON TOPIC PLEASE!!! And for your information... I don't have the patience to aggravate myself even more by how did you state it? "by cursing everyone else for my ship's destruction"!!! I play one-handed and don't have time for all that one-handed typing crap!!!! Wargaming told me the forums are the best place to have my suggestions seen by the developers instead of me submitting support tickets to them... Please Note: I followed their advice and posted my suggestion here for player opinions on my suggestion... NOT TO RECEIVE IMMATURE PERSONAL ATTACKS BASED SOLELY ON IGNORANCE!!! Oh... So you ARE one of those who makes themself feel better by putting down others... Not a very good character trait my friend.
  13. I'm not a great player by any means, but this past ranked season I gave up after only two days due to frustration because I kept ending up on the losing team and only three times did I ever manage to keep my star. I love playing DDs and the biggest problem I was seeing is my team mates would turn tail and run and throw me under the radar popping undestracted focus fire bus while they saved their butts (for the moment) as soon as I spotted multiple enemy at nearly the same time; and it is usually these turn tail allies who scored the least xp. By doing that, they almost guarantee I will not have the highest xp on the losing team unless I can take several of the enemy down with me! I even had a battle in the 7v7 format with slightly over 80K damage dealt and 3 kills and we still lost and I lost a star!!! That was my last ranked battle on my second day of playing this past regular season. I would like to see the scoring dynamics expanded in the following manner: I think it would be much more fair for two or even three players on the losing team to keep their star and for the worst supporting player (Lowest XP) to not only lose a star, but lose an entire rank! 1 - Player with the most XP keeps their star. 2 - Player who dealt the most damage keeps their star. 3 - Player with the most ships destroyed keeps their star unless there is a tie with another ally in which case only the first two keep their stars. 4 - Player with the lowest XP loses an entire rank. The ranks currently categorized as "IRREVOCABLE" would have to be categorized as "PROTECTED". I think this would be a justifiably fair solution for everyone who complains about "It ain't right" the way it is. For balance purposes it would seem that more stars will be needed to progress a rank under this proposed format and still keep it balanced in that 4 to 6 times as many stars needed to gain a rank would probably work well, and even as many as 20 to 25 stars between the last few highest ranks. Under this proposed scoring system, it will be a bit easier to move ahead, and devastating if you have a habit of placing last on your team (which I rarely do - I'm just being honest here... I can pull a Notser too on occasion, and deserve receiving whatever platter they serve my butt on). OKAY!!! There's regular "Ranked Battles"... There's "Ranked - Sprint"... So what do we call this if they use it? "Ranked - Justice" perhaps, or maybe with how many more stars will be needed they could call it "Ranked - Grand Judgement"
  14. Assisted_Suicide

    Clan Administration Guide

    According to what I know, and I am a clan commander in WOWS... The Commanders (both THE Commander and the Deputy Commanders) are the only ones who have the authority to "exclude" / remove a member from a clan. The old military phrase of "Crap rolls downhill" is perfectly applicable in the clan command hierarchy. The Commander can send invitations and accept applications and exclude anyone of lesser rank and use the clan's resources for funding the building of base infrastructure.. The Deputy Commanders can send invitations and accept applications and exclude anyone of lesser rank and use the clan's resources for funding the building of base infrastructure.. The Recruiter can send invitations and approve applications, but has no additional authorities. The recruiter cannot exclude anyone from the clan. The Recruiter cannot use clan resources to facilitate the building of clan infrastructure. The Line Officers by rank are merely worker bees helping to accrue the clan's resources. That simple!
  15. I've got Captain Ovechkin and: 1. considering his talents on the ice and his aggressive play style, 2. considering that Yakamoto Isoroku has special talents which require accomplishments of First Blood and Kraken Unleashed in order to activate the them, 3 considering that Admiral Halsey has special talents which require the Double Strike and Confederate achievements in order to activate his, I am totally surprised commander Ovechkin does not have 2 special talents activated by the accompanying achievements. A. Calculated Attack - whereby the main battery and secondary battery dispersion is reduced by 8% each time you score a hat trick by destroying 3 enemy ships (repeatable and cumulative until end of battle) (3 = -8%, 6 = -16%, etc). B. Accelerated Attack whereby the ships maximum speed is increased by 8%, and time to max speed is also reduced by 8%, and rudder shift time is reduced by 8% when the Devastating Strike achievement is earned. This change to his capabilities would add a fine dynamic to the game in keeping with his character and Great 8 nickname while not being overly powerful and add a huge incentive for players to purchase him from the premium shop. So how do you explain the change with the addition of the talents? Simple!!! You post a news release... "Ovechkin Goes Pro!" And for those who already have the American or Russian commander without the special talents, you can add a personal combat mission after playing him one time with the following requirements which may be completed simultaneously in Random, Ranked, Scenario, or Co Op Battles: 1 Score 8 Hat Tricks - Win 3 consecutive battles (8 times) over any number of battles (24 battles minimum). 2. Team Captain after the 2004 Draft - Earn 2004 Captain's XP in one Battle. 3. Golden Stick Award - Destroy 500 ships in any number of battles. 4. 2nd Golden Stick Award - Sore 500 main battery hits and 500 Secondary Battery hits in any number of battles.
×