Jump to content


Beta Testers
  • Content Сount

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

  • Clan


Community Reputation

3,981 Superb

About Herr_Reitz

  • Rank
    Fleet Admiral
  • Insignia

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

6,397 profile views
  1. Herr_Reitz

    So nerfs to premium ships huh?

    I have a theory about all this cause you know, like every one of us individually, my universe is centered upon my actions. It's the butterfly effect, right? Last December I think it was, I bought a one year subscription. I've not played for nearly two months now. Heck when I visit I don't find too many posts with lots of posts. So I was surprised to see this thread. Of course, nothing came via email from WoWS. Nope. So I wouldn't be surprised if yes, this is the year the player counts start tanking. B'cause I bought a year's subscription. I'll keep checking here just to see what things are when they get better sorted. Meanwhile, carry on!
  2. Herr_Reitz

    Almost unbelievable work with models

    After an eye doctor told me hey, you're just getting old, it happens to nearly all of us, cheaters are fine. He means the cheap puppies you buy at box retails stores, so that's what I'm using now. What I get irritated about is the **&& things slipping and sliding off my face, always at the wrong time. There are some for third-world nations that use oil lenses, you can just adjust them till you can see. Pretty good idea.
  3. Herr_Reitz

    Almost unbelievable work with models

    No, not those kind of models - these kind of models. I also encourage you to check out all their videos as they are quite good. Here's the one the algorithm put up on me Just wow.
  4. Herr_Reitz

    Explain this Wargaming >_>

    In order for this to work, I do believe you have "zero" your reticle using the screen size adjusment in optionsl. You have to make sure you have it set properly. I believe iChase had a video about zeroing your reticle. When you do this, the small target indicator in the minimap over your target will actually be accurate and pointing to your enemy ship. I suspect if it is proven to be valid then its GL GG for WoWS as it is, no doubt, part of the entire aiming mechanics. Have you never seen enemy shells falling at your ship turn as they fall, ensuring you cannot escape them?
  5. Herr_Reitz

    Do commander skills really matter?

    Y'know... some old timers used to suggest the use of skills actually made the battle harder for the player, something to do with RNG I suppose. If everyone is running the skills, camos and all the fluff fluff available for the game, in a strange way it would as if nobody was because everyone would have the same advantages. In that scenario, you would be playing at a lower competitive level if you too did not have all "the good stuff". Seriously here... the one I hated were camo effects... almost always puts a dent in dispersion/accuracy skills.
  6. Herr_Reitz

    EPIC Games Version of warships confusion

    From the outside looking in at this, "main" could mean your main Epic account or your main WoWS account. At least that seems what the confusion is about.
  7. Herr_Reitz

    The heat WG is getting isn't deserved

    Such as yourself? Or are you a re-roll or alternate account? Pretty much everything tossed at WG/WoWS these days has been earned through a whole lot of effort on their part. If you've been around since Alpha/Beta, you'd know this. If you haven't, what qualifies you for putting out "My advice to new players"? Sign me Jess Askin
  8. As it was explained then, it was "supposed to be" related to tiers. I wasn't "allowed" to play CVs for the test, which was my beachpoint to start with, of course. It seems everyone felt/believed CVs got up-tiered more than other ships, cause you know, reasons. When I ran the tests I played primarily BBs with some battles in cruisers. https://forum.worldofwarships.com/topic/226709-carrier-up-tier-must-stop/?do=findComment&comment=5219511 This was a summary paragraph: Herr_Reitz has screen shots for these last 18 battles (all at T8) & has 10 in T10 battles (none of the battles were T9 battles...all either top or bottom tier) Only the last 4 were CV battles...the 1st 14 were BBs & cruisers w/7 each top & bottom tier...then in the last 4 CV battles 3 out of 4 were T10 battles making 10 T10 battles (10/9/8) to 8 T8 battles (8/7/6) out of the last 18 battles. CVs, all ships, imo, need limited in their up-tiering. HARD limits, regardless of ship or ship type. Could you "game" hard limits? Probably, but for what purpose I'm not sure. As it is now, one "could" keep track of their matches then play their stupidly OP ships when they "should" be even tiered. We have enough of every ship type these days... I feel it's time to revisit and revise how they build matches, in total, but for me, I'd like to see CVs tiering work from the top-down instead of the bottom up. Could work well for all tiers I suppose, if/when tier mixing is needed for "balance" or "low player counts" or whatever the reasons where it makes sense.
  9. In some cases, complaints are valid, when it comes to up-tiering. Sure, play Tier X or Tier III right? I got sick of it playing tier VI carriers so many times against T8 AA etc... so that's why I kept track. Others have done the same in the past. I believe the original reason for the two-tier spread was low player counts. It seems we are stuck with it now, all these years later. So I wonder if it still is there because of low player counts?
  10. A good number of months back, I brought up the issue regarding this alleged 40%, strict this and that... I played strictly T8 iirc... and it did not hold true for 20 battles. Nothing was ever noted officially. I can feel reasonably comfortable in suggesting it is a "desired" percentage, not a hard percentage. My analysis was how many times I got up-tiered by one or two tiers. Face it - this is what it is and will not change unless there is financial incentive to change it. Couch every change as to how it impacts the finances, you'll soon learn that is the way of the sheet.
  11. No, probably won't... until some take-down strikes are put against his YT account for any number of reasons. If they want to make an example of someone, he would likely be their best candidate.
  12. Who thinks in a week this will all be just a speed bump in the parking lot of life?
  13. So I sat out an entire week of game play. I had unrealistic hopes that somehow the game would have self-adjusted to the new skill rework. Perhaps that's what the devs think too? Aw, just focus on new content, they'll get used to things. Maybe in a few more weeks we'll have captured enough data... On my part, I put a good amount of damage out, for me. If you try to push, at all, you are more or less alone. Shoot, it doesn't even need to be a solo or yolo effort. Just be a bit further forward than the next ship and you get focused. So in this match I followed "the group". We actually were doing okay in the beginning. Had more caps, even on the ship exchange. Then suddenly, our team started dropping ship by ship without a return in kind to the reds. I know I contributed to that by firing AP sparingly. Used to be, you know, you could get long-term HE damage via fires. Out of my total damage shown, those five fires only generated 25K in damage. Another 49,829 damage is HE damage (modules and the like perhaps?) and finishing it out, 23K damage from AP. My question here is this: In the skill rework, did changes get implemented that alters damage earned by fires? In general, is DoT worth it these days? tiafyc
  14. "Players utilized this skill in ways we did not anticipate..."
  15. The game exists for those who created it as a means of providing income (food, clothing, shelter, etc) for them, by creating things from nothing which exist strictly in digital, virtual worlds. The goal of the game is the transfer of real life wealth from one group of individuals to another, freely, willingly. It is primarily, as are all games, a wealth transfer system. AKA, a business. It really is all about money, bottom line. Can't get away from it. Therefore, my conclusion would be they settled upon this method/means of releasing things because financially, it works for them. It has nothing to do with you, me or us. All things are constantly adjusted to ensure maximum wealth transfer. This way of doing things clearly checks off many boxes in the best way to trigger wealth transfer. The only challenge? Push the transfer to the very limit of sustainability but not beyond it. What is another few single digits increases to the wealth transfer if it causes the entire system to collapse? This is the line they constantly monitor to ensure they stay close but do not cross it. Keep all those psychological triggers getting tripped to sustain a stead stream of wealth transfer. If I'm correct then what to do? Just play the game as it is. Do not want nor wish for things which in the short or long run will affect the wealth transfer process. I'm not participating in the Italian stuff because, FOR ME, it isn't a valuable exchange of my time/life for another digital boat. I have just over a HUNDRED of them - Good Lord, when would I play them? You can only play one at a time. Apologies if this is off-topic as intended by the OP.