Jump to content

ianh070

Beta Testers
  • Content Сount

    12
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    10415
  • Clan

    [USNR]

Community Reputation

4 Neutral

About ianh070

  • Rank
    Seaman
  • Insignia

Recent Profile Visitors

266 profile views
  1. ianh070

    Update 0.9.5 - Dockyard and the Odin!

    I don't post often but after 5 years of this game play. Wargaming, you keep screwing up. making folks regrind the T10 (gotta get people to play that soviet line again, huh?), nerfing so many legendary mods, specifically just completely removing the usefulness of the Des Moines. The argument "it still accelerates faster" is bad, you've made the legendary module that a lot of people worked hard for, I'm certain MANY people reground tech tree lines to get the RP...I know I'm not the only one tired of these kinds of changes. After 5 years I'm very close to reaching the point of not playing anymore. Stop shoving crummy changes on the game that are certainly going to force changes in how people play the game. But who knows, maybe the dockyard isn't a bad this time around as it was for the Puerto Rico. Time will tell...
  2. ianh070

    WG please address MM, or fix it....

    Yeah, I get that...but that means that each game should have an average outcome (or maybe a balanced outcome is a better way of saying it). not taking into account skill means that goes the same way for both sides?
  3. ianh070

    WG please address MM, or fix it....

    Just to add to the comments here...MM has to be broken, because otherwise how does this happen? When one team loses no ships at all and the other was obliterated? And I think we can all agree that this has happened to us all more than once. And I included a couple screenshots of super lopsided games. I'm sorry that I only have screenshots of winning games. I promise I'm not trying to subtly brag lol. I guess I just didn't want to remember my bad lopsided defeats but i'll have to start taking screenshots of those.
  4. ianh070

    What "Unlimited Aircraft" Actually Means...

    Mouse, thanks for the deep dive on the changes. While I recognize the intent behind the changes to CVs, I must admit that I find there are still a significant amount of issues. Maybe they'll be resolved with balancing updates, maybe not. While you're correct that "unlimited" doesn't mean truly unlimited, the real issue with it is the lack of downtime between air attacks. A DD does have to wait between attacks, while a CV can constantly have planes in the air with as little downtime as it takes to fly to the target. Take your T10 IJN CV and that results in (as many of the youtube videos have pointed out) a constant stream of torps resulting in cause absolute havoc (and, ironically, causing I think a worse case of good CV vs bad CV game impact than before) among the surface vessels. Also, the US/IJN lines aren't at all balanced... The benefit of the old system was that it required CVs to play smart rather than drop in for a quick hit then relaunch planes immediately. I think that it results in a play style that is absolutely careless, which is not characteristic of the other types of ships. On the other hand, one of my biggest gripes is that the CVs don't have any sort of alpha strike capability. WG intended to make CVs more playable and of similar style to the other types of ships, instead, it seems that they have made them unlike every other ship type in as many ways as possible. Ultimately, this is what we're stuck with, so I've been learning to adapt and begun playing the new CVs so I can at least speak from a level of knowledge. while the goal of rework was good, and there are a lot of uninformed haters, I do think that WG screwed the pooch (as it were) on the rework. But hey, CVs were broke before, so what's new...I'll just keep doing my thing.
  5. Now you're using poor logical arguments (red herring). Yes, a generic comment, no I'm not using it to assign that to people other than to whom it applies (and therefore not a stereotype). The point is that the CVs are a part of the game. To argue for a "no CV" option would begin a deconstruction of the game as a whole as there are people who don't enjoy playing with BBs, CAs, or DDs, so at what point does WG stop adding "no pick your ship type" options? Then don't eat vanilla ice cream. But that's a completely irrelevant analogy to the game. Anyway, we're talking about a game and I feel like I'm reading/replying to the comment section of a political forum, so I'm out.
  6. No assumptions, but over the 3.5 years of playing, I've seen way too many complaints about the reason for not liking them is how people die to them. So no assumptions, simply inferring from several years of experience what the common complaint actually is.
  7. It's a useless conversation with the upcoming changes. That said, historically, I love playing with CVs, it adds (literally) a third dimension and an extra challenge. What fun is a game without some challenge? There's nothing quite like having to engage enemy ships while doing some dip, dodge, duck, and weave action from enemy aircraft. Also, no CV option? When I'm in a light cruiser I don't like BBs, so how about a no BB option? That's just not a good idea. I say if you don't like something because you die, well, learn how to adapt and survive. You become a better player by learning how to defeat threats, not complaining till the gameplay you don't like is removed.
  8. ianh070

    Fletcher

    I guess I don't know how to DD anymore, then based off of folks comments. I despise the Fletcher, in fact, I hated both the Benson and Fletcher while I loved Farragut and Mahan. I am just frustrated by mediocre torps and guns when compared to other nations DDs. I feel like it just can't compete against other DDs.
×