Jump to content


WoWS Community Contributors
  • Content Сount

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

  • Clan


Community Reputation

27,219 Superb

About LittleWhiteMouse

  • Rank
    Vice Admiral
  • Birthday February 14
  • Insignia

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  • Skype

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    The Realm of Chaos
  • Interests
    Hobbies: Reading, Writing (duh), Roleplay, Photography, Drawing, Painting, Sculpting, Animating
    Favourite Game IPs: Warcraft, Wildstar, Warhammer

Recent Profile Visitors

189,970 profile views
  1. LittleWhiteMouse

    One big issue WG faces with nerfing CV

    Yeah, that doesn't hold water nor does your list. Short of what's catalogued by the Supertest Coordinators, non-employees have no way knowing the full scope of what has and has not been fed back to Wargaming. All we have are what fellow players have said they have brought up and those we have reported ourselves.
  2. LittleWhiteMouse

    One big issue WG faces with nerfing CV

    No, they weren't. Some were dependent upon other changes being made -- changes that only came as a result from playing on live.
  3. LittleWhiteMouse

    One big issue WG faces with nerfing CV

    As nice as that would have been, it's not realistic. Consider the following issues that have already been found: Enlightened dropping Slingshot dropping Flying Shimakazes F-recall spam AA DPS being too strong AA DPS being too weak Aircraft speed IJN Reserves not being deep enough Dive Bomber accuracy Aerial detection is too high Fighters not activating fast enough CV sniping Reinforcement sector UI Surface ships feeling victimized CV deplaning 400k+ damage games Now, public test could (in theory) eventually find these things. But you have to ask yourself: How many people would it take and how long would it take them? I remind you that not all of these issues existed from the start and only came to light after other changes had been made. It's been an ongoing process since 2017, so it's not like they're dragging their heels on this and it's not like they're rushing either. The CV rebalance is easily WG's primary focus at the moment with other projects working around its implementation and balance. And even with this said, it's still not progressing as fast as they would like it. Locking it behind a test server would have easily doubled or tripled the time it took and we'd still see it show up on live, incomplete and in need of changes. I mean I get it -- don't think I don't. It sucks playing through a testing phase. Trust me, I know. I've been doing it non-stop in this game since October 2015. I've got quite the thick skin for playing with unfinished and unbalanced assets in World of Warships. But you cannot fault Wargaming for not trying to get this right. That they're knuckling down and still plugging away at it instead of washing their hands and saying "good enough" is a testament to that. What you can fault them for is making the game experience crappy. They're working hard. It's just a pain to play while they're toiling away.
  4. LittleWhiteMouse

    One big issue WG faces with nerfing CV

    About three to four months. So end of summer is my best guess. We're already seeing some of it being implemented. For example, in patch 0.8.4, dive bombers are going to be easier to dodge for destroyers and select cruisers, so that's something. I'm willing to bet we'll continue to see implementations incrementally rather than one big hallelujah patch.
  5. LittleWhiteMouse

    One big issue WG faces with nerfing CV

    The challenge isn't in nerfing CVs (nor any balance decision). Tweaks to CV performance won't affect players of different skill types disproportionately. The issue isn't CV balance -- it hasn't been since early on in the CV rework and it was largely corrected by with only the tier 10 CVs and a couple of tier 8s being outliers. The challenge is to make CVs fun to play against by providing surface ships the ability to have some form of active defense. This is where the challenge lies: making surface ships feel like they have some ownership in their survivability against carriers. The numbers spat out are easy to tweak. It's the core mechanic that's missing currently and needs to be discovered and implemented.
  6. LittleWhiteMouse

    Proposal for DD/Torp issue in PvE

    There are (generally) only two type of ships that have harder time in co-op mode: Light cruisers lacking torpedoes and aircraft carriers. Any other class can alpha strike just as well as destroyers provided you charge in.
  7. LittleWhiteMouse

    A non-weebs adventure with AL Commanders

    I like to imagine she gets very sweaty pits and has to air them out constantly.
  8. I'd love to see that quote. Can you dig it up?
  9. I'm looking at these competitive seasons as having a threefold purpose. To give those that have been playing carriers the chance to try them out in a new game mode so that things don't get stale for them. To prove their support for the ship type and that they feel it's advanced enough in development and balancing to warrant trying it out in competitive game modes. To collect data outside of co-op, training rooms and random battles to further future balancing designs and decisions. Wargaming survived the Radio Location outrage. That allowed them to grow some fairly thick skin when it comes to vocal "majorities".
  10. LittleWhiteMouse

    ST: New ships - Hayate and Thunderer

    They did many studies with the L and N series. Barbettes are heavy, so they tried with and without. The catch is you have to extend the magazine somewhat (and its protection) to compensate, so the savings might not be quite what you're hoping.
  11. LittleWhiteMouse

    Premium Ship Review #105: HMCS Haida

    I wish I knew. Wargaming is very hush-hush about changes to the online store. In my own experience mapping such things, they tend to change up what ships are available every six months or so. We MIGHT luck out and get something new to entice wallets over the summer, but the change to the armour was recent so I'm honestly not expecting to see the ships there changed up until September at the earliest.
  12. LittleWhiteMouse

    Why almost all good players hate CVs

    You're not wrong. My original advocating to Wargaming was for disruption effects to be added to skills -- so that ships weren't shutting down CVs outright, but simply making their drops more difficult and avoiding their ordnance easier. Somehow, I don't think we'll see anything come of this given that it hasn't been implemented already. Some form of scaling is necessary, however, to make AA defense active and scale well. It cannot be a case where someone playing an AA-deficient ship can claim immunity to AA. On the flip side, we also can't have a prevalence of god-tier AA as their coverage would make playing CVs impossible. The solution (to me) seems to make it an unlikely combination. DFAA + Skills + Upgrades + limited number of ship-classes to provide the kind of immunity some people are hoping for. With this bar set as the absolute maximum, acceptable levels of defense could be scaled in between this plateau and the dregs who are nothing but ready victims. The catch is, of course, that this kind of setup needs to be bought and paid for at the expense of a ship's other parameters or it becomes a no brainer. Unfortunately for ships like Minotaur and Des Moines, there really aren't a lot of other skills worth investing into which makes the build a no-brainer, which we cannot have.
  13. LittleWhiteMouse

    ST: New ships - Hayate and Thunderer

    I question which part Wargaming will emphasize -- firepower or survivability. Looking at her right now, she'd make a good tier 9 ship, but not a tier 10.