Jump to content

Jakob_Knight

Beta Testers
  • Content count

    1,163
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    4965
  • Clan

    [BWC]

Community Reputation

533 Excellent

About Jakob_Knight

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

1 Follower

Recent Profile Visitors

352 profile views
  1. Personally, I use PT if all I have is one point to spend, due to the information it gives. However, the one exception is that PM is my first choice on my high-tier DDs that use Torpedo Reload modules to help offset the increased chance of torpedo tubes being disabled.
  2. Encore Graphics Engine

    There is a HUGE amount of work and time involved in what you are asking. Literally years if not the better part of a decade's worth of resources involved. It is not something you can ask for and expect to get just because you want it. Especially since there is nothing to gain gameplay-wise doing so that the current engine doesn't provide. In short, if you want a better engine, be ready to be asked what you are willing to do to make that happen beyond simply making threads on the Forums after the devs have said no. Just pushing a dead horse will not make it alive.
  3. Improve the game play meta nerf torps

    In fact, the torpedoes used by the Shimakaze were nerfed before with the same reasons given. It has had absolutely no effect on BBs staying back and keeping to the edges of the battle. This is because, as was stated before that nerf and is still the case, long-ranged torpedoes are not the cause of this, and so such nerfs do nothing to solve it. The real reason is the extreme range and power of the weapons of BBs themselves. This is where any changes have to be made if you want to 'fix' this issue.
  4. What do you think of RDF?

    Any three ships working as a team to kill one ship is going to be scary, but I'll take that over three radar cruisers working together against my DD. At least I have a decent chance to kill one of the DDs.
  5. Replays

    Yup. Now, imagine you are talking about players who don't know this is enabled, and they play 1000 games. They may be wondering where that gigabite of HDD space went. 4000 games? 10,000 games? Better to keep it off by default and let players who are comfortable knowing what they can and can't delete in their game folders enable it if they want it. As you said, it's super easy to do so, and keeps those players who are less than savvy at the computers they use not have to worry about suddenly running out of HDD space one day.
  6. Replays

    Because this particular function changes how the game accesses and generates files, which involves the file structure of the program? Trying to change the file structure of a program while it is running is just asking for corruption of the program, or at least a program crash as the command lines are changed mid-process. Ultimately, it's probably something that can't be done safely while the game is running, though I may be wrong. Either way, the utility is a very easy way to do the same job, so there should be no issue here I can see.
  7. Replays

    Probably more difficult than giving players an easy to use utility, given that the UI has to be changed to make it work. Even if they did, you would still need to close the game and log back in for the option to take effect. So, it is actually easier just to use the utility program before you even launch the game to do it. And, let's face it...if running a file, typing '1', and then playing the game is too hard, then a check box won't help much.
  8. Replays

    Actually, if you look at that page, WG included a utility to enable replays easily. Editing the XML file is a backup method if that fails. And, considering that enabling replays causes the game to consume more and more disc space as each game is played, if a player doesn't feel comfortable working with their game folder, it's probably best to keep the feature disabled by default.
  9. Which is why so many people have provided reasons and evidence to back up the removal beyond 'because I don't like it'. This isn't just a matter of personal preferences but of gameplay effects. If it were something like custom camo mods which don't affect the game except personal appreciation and appearance, I wouldn't be on the side asking for it to be removed because there would be no solid case against it.
  10. But the only mods that could be viewed as similar would be aim-assist mods or those that no one cares about because they don't do anything and aren't needed. You should be all for removing those, if only to remove clutter and eliminate a serious issue among the playerbase over concerns raised about fair play using such mods. Or, at least not care if those mods disappeared tomorrow.
  11. What do you think of RDF?

    Personally, I use both PT and RPF. No reason not to get as much information as you can on the enemy and having one does not preclude having the other. Plus, more tactics to use against the enemy never hurts. Of course, it depends on what your ship needs to do. Putting RDF on a South Carolina is probably a waste, and most DDs already know anyone who can spot them is going to put main guns on them, so they can do without PT.
  12. Seems like this is the summary: "The mod is an unfair advantage and counts as aim assist". Solution: Remove the mod. "The mod doesn't matter, and doesn't do anything". Solution: Remove the Mod. "The mod doesn't matter because everything it does I can do without it.". Solution: Remove the mod. Thus, everyone in this thread seems to agree this mod should be banned, if only because it doesn't matter and will eliminate a thing that is causing friction. Wonder why, then, we seem to have so many who want badly to keep it? And why the devs approved its use in the first place when they had to see that it had no place in their game.
  13. What do you think of RDF?

    RPF is a skill that depends heavily on the player using it. Sounds like you are a player who knows how to use the information it gives, so it should be quite effective. On the Atago, it is a bit of a mixed bag. The IJN guns fire and turn slow, so that diminishes the benefits of the ship as a DD hunter using this skill. On the other hand, you have the concealment to use it against other Cruisers. While I am on record stating how powerful this skill is, I would say get it on an Atago specifically only if you do not want to boost its AA. That's a personal choice as the AA isn't going to be great either way, but could be useful to have every bit you can grab if you plan on working alone. One thing to consider is that the Atago is a Premium, so you might spec a second captain with other skills and use them as you need. That way, you can chose to have RPF or not before queing up.
  14. The real problem with these kind of threads is that you are trying to tell devs who like the advantages the mods give to them when they play the game to give up those mods. It doesn't work. We've been stating the case against the Relative Angle Indicator (which undeniably gives much more accurate info on a target than possible without it), and gotten nowhere because it is enjoyed by the devs. They won't ban something they personally enjoy. And the players who like these kinds of mods won't let them be banned because they rely on them to be able to be any good at the game. They will always claim any such mod 'doesn't give any advantage you don't have already in the game' when it is blatantly obvious to anyone with eyes that it does, but will scream murder if you suggest removing it. Yeah. The reason these mods exist is because they provide advantage to the person who mods the game that they don't get playing without them. That conversely means those playing without them are disadvantaged when playing in a game with those who do use them. Simple and undeniable logic. Yet both the devs and players who need these mods to be able to be any good at the game will deny the blatantly true because it benefits them. All in all, a pointless effort. The devs will only ban mods they don't personally like, and allow those they do regardless of any statements that any mod that gives an unfair advantage in gameplay is unacceptable. It's all personal bias, and you can't make someone see what they don't want to see when they make the rules.
  15. No worries. The other problem with the ship was that as soon as you fired one launcher, your point of aim would switch to the next one. This meant you had to re-aim, and repeat for each launcher, one at a time. What that translated into was a good 5-10 seconds where you were not steering your ship well and your torpedoes came out in a stream of waves rather than a single wave. Often by the time you got done firing one side or torps, you were dead from citadels.
×