Jump to content

Combined_Fleet_HQ

Members
  • Content count

    1,143
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    4041
  • Clan

    [O7]

Community Reputation

392 Excellent

About Combined_Fleet_HQ

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    A Concrete Jungle where dreams are made
  • Interests
    WW II, Dark Souls Lore, touhou music, FPS, MMOs, Grand Strategy, Halo

Recent Profile Visitors

2,329 profile views
  1. Ever count your number of blacklisted names?

    There was one guy who I should have blacklisted for all the justification was there, but his ravings were increasingly more and more ridiculous that I just had to see what came next.... Though I think the whole forum got a kick out of this guy... Welp he's banned now and no longer plays so I guess my blacklist stays at zero
  2. So... FDG

    Off the top of my head when I played it Skills (in order of acquisition): Priority Target Adrenaline Rush Basics of Survivability Fire Prevention Expert AFT High Alert Superintendent Alternatives: Fire Prevention -> Concealment Expert Superintendent -> Expert Marksman + Direction Center for Catapult Sorry, but I forget what modules are where after their placements were changed a few patches ago... I would say take concealment, damage control, secondary range, secondary + AA survivability, main battery reload I tried taking main battery dispersion mod but it's a german BB with only 8 guns, still doesn't help
  3. Ideas for the Massachusetts

    Nah mate, can't do that. That's the IJN's flavor for premiums: stock ships at a tier lower. Mutsu Ashitaka Musashi (possibly even the Kii if you argue its original design) As for the gimmicks statement, can't agree with you more.
  4. Ideas for the Massachusetts

    Or: Scrap the idea of trying to create a whole new ship that is different enough from her sister premium to warrant her purchase while still retaining the general characteristics of South Dakota Class. Instead, turn the Massachusetts into a $20-$35 premium camo for the Alabama, that changes the appearance of the Alabama to the Massachusetts (i.e. # of dual purpose guns, bofors, etc), modify some of the ships parameters to match the change in design (i.e. Mid and Long range AA), and when dropping into a match the ships shows up as the Massachusetts The way the Alabama, and even the North Carolina, are designed leaves little to no room for further variation. Trying to do so just resorts in a ship that is inferior to either of these And if you ask "well what about those who don't have the Alabama?" Ok well, instead of putting the Alabama on sale again and potentially flooding the MM with more BBs while also forcing Massachusetts lovers to fork over the cash for a Alabama and the skin, do this: Have a limited run of "Alabama Crates" which act like the Christmas crates. They have an increased chance of a supercontainer which only gives the Alabama. Should they get the Alabama supercontainer, they also receive a coupon which can be redeemed after completing a campaign. This provides those players with a free Massachusetts skin. The distribution of these crates can either be through selling in the premium shop so that its acts more as a roll of the dice stopgap that prevents Alabama flooding the mm or the month prior introduce missions which reward these crates in advance prior to the campaign itself. This event can be run as a lead up to 4th of July or a yearly anniversary, or something of the sort. Its good PR, people have a chance of Massachusetts and a "free" (depending on the distribution method) premium VIII, and you solve the issue of how to design the Massachusetts (for those who "downvote" this, at least explain why...)
  5. Cry Me a River

    Alright, we've called out his choice of det flag, may we move on to the source of his frustration which is the GZ? My two cents: Yeah, GZ is still the worst PR dumpsterfire WoWs has ever dealt with. And their solution was equally as bad. It was a lose-lose from the getgo.
  6. Montana obselete?

    Same opinion, I've had the Monty as my second X BB after Yammy...I used to prefer Iowa over Monty but recently realized how much I love the Monty. She's honestly my favorite out of the X BBs. Like her more than Conqueror.
  7. VIII is getting some love

    The few times I went back to it (at Hindenburg), I've tried to run double rudder on her like her X counterpart, but concealment is more needed.
  8. At what range will you change targets to a spotted DD?

    Normally at ~10km, 13km at most... ...this changes if the DD is within one shot or close to, at which point I will try to get him at ranges of 15-18km...
  9. I know man, the advice he left was practically prophetic
  10. World Of Warships: The True Issues Facing Us

    I agree to an extent. Knowing the mechanics that constitute game play such as krupp values or shell fuse time should remain more speculation based on historical references or in-game testing. Otherwise the nitpicking that you referred to gets out of hand and becomes deconstructive However, what I believe the OP is referring to in terms of transparency is what's currently in development, what is working, and what needs to return to the drawing board; additionally, OP wants WG to explain their intent with the design choices of respective ships which is somewhat similar to what you were talking about. They and others presumably have issue with ships being featured by CC's and disappear for several months with little explanation other than the assumptions of the CC's or the community. With ST's under an NDA (nothing wrong with that), the flow of information is even more sparse so it leaves even more scratching their heads
  11. World Of Warships: The True Issues Facing Us

    my two cents: I chalk it up to WG attempting to introduce ships that, at its basis, is a carbon copy or close to other ships in terms of performance or statistics and attempts to design them in a way to differentiate and pitch them to us as ships worth buying. This may be due to the foundation with which the ship is designed on or an external mechanic or "gimmick" which changes its gameplay. Its easier to do in WoT than in WoWs. I would look to: Hipper: Eugen King George V : Duke of York New York : Texas North Carolina : Alabama Queen Elizabeth : Warspite Bismarck : Tirpitz The endgoal is to provide ships that players want to buy by making them different/unique while also trying to ensure that the changes do not make them overpowered/underpowered which results in long development times and issues with balance ...but this also applies to non-premium as well: for example: RN BBs RN CLs French BBs CVs HE, AP, sigma, fuse time, dispersion, RoF, radar, 1/4 pen vs 1/6 pen, speed boost etc... WG has attempted to create a game in which the complex mechanics that dictate gameplay are standardized but differentiated at the same time and it boils down to the same issues that plague the old argument of realism vs arcade: wargaming, by shooting for both, either has to sacrifice one more than the other or fail in both aspects. Which does not bode well for the community in either aspect, someone is always bound to be pissed off... tl:dr its hard to develop a game with history as its basis
  12. World Of Warships: The True Issues Facing Us

    And here I thought we were on a video game forum.... Just me overthinking things again (p.s. just poking fun)
  13. World Of Warships: The True Issues Facing Us

    lack of transparency is what I've gathered
  14. yikes the DD mafia is in full force this evening... I like the idea of DDs being the hard counters to BBs as they should be, but there's better ways to do that than designing a destroyer that can fire with impunity who leaves only a few seconds of reaction time before doing massive damage and causing flooding. It's why I hate DWT and, subsequently, the pan asian line. Its the principle that im mainly bothered by DWTs are a reaction by WG to curb the BB overpopulation issue just like radar for DDs. However, WG already had a line designed since CBT as the definitive BB counter: IJN DDs. Instead of finally taking the initiative to rework that line from the ground up, they just introduced another gimicky line. Which wouldn't be so much of a problem but CAs got lumped in as effective targets as to ensure that line was not totally niche or handicapped For that range, alpha strike, and concealment on the torps, you have to nerf one aspect of it. Seriously, you have a VIII ship with torps outperforming the likes of Xs such as the gearing with a higher speed, more alpha, and more range while also carrying a higher concealment than the Z-52. Its disgusting. Yes in exchange, it only hits BBs and CVs to offset those stats, but why must a DD be designed in such a way?
  15. more incoming midway nerf

    just a little late to the party.... ...but yes, not the fix needed to balance the Midway.
×