Jump to content


Beta Testers
  • Content Сount

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

  • Clan


Community Reputation

603 Excellent

1 Follower

About Jakob_Knight

  • Rank
    Lieutenant Junior Grade
  • Insignia

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

538 profile views
  1. The CV rework will affect every ship, so yeah....I can see this being held off until they get done figuring out how surface ships will be able to survive against the massive damage farm that CVs will become. Currently, a DD has little chance, so it might be a good idea for them to wait until they find a way for the ship to actually survive long enough to actually make people want to buy her beyond her historical value. I can also get behind the F3 + TRB and 34knt speed proposals. The F3s don't work at T9/T10 because of the capabilities of the ships at that level of play, but T7 is quite playable with that kind of range. I would note that we had calls for both Captain Hara and the Shigure since before the IJN DD rework, and WG has not indicated interest in either. Perhaps that will change, but I feel they are much more interested in other projects and other national lines.
  2. Jakob_Knight

    CV Rework Feedback

    So, if I understand correctly, I am having my odd-tier CVs taken away, and to get them back, I need to grind them up all over again once the second branch with the same carriers in them I already grinded for is released in the future? And, because I got to the Essex and didn't decide to go to the Midway, I now get bumped to only being able to go up to T8 in my CV use? And this is what WG calls fair and an improvement to the game. That along with the seeming admission that those of us who have the Saipan and Enterprise will end up with two T8 CVs that have exactly the same stats and capabilities in the game, rendering it rather pointless to have purchased them both. This smacks of WG taking the easy way out rather than being willing to put in the effort to actually make an honest day's work to find a way to make the odd tiers work. And, of course, it's the players who end up getting hurt by it. Oh well. Guess WG didn't have as many good ideas about CV rework as we were led to believe.
  3. Jakob_Knight

    The Best Thing WG has Done for WoWS - Ranked Sprint

    I think the 'OP Premium' flag is waved much too often in this case. The tech tree ships are quite strong now, and I can say that I find my Nicholas is actually a better all-around DD in this than my Fujin. The results are much more due to the skill of the players involved than the perceived difference from the use of Premium ships ( despite the differences, the Minekaze can perform very similarly to a Kamikaze in the hands of the same player). As for more experienced players bringing their experience in gameplay to the battles, that will happen no matter what tier Ranked is played at. If anything, it should make you want to play against them even more for the chance to take on opponents who are worth fighting. The only bad thing about the Ranked Sprint is that it is happening at the same time as the Halloween event is active, diluting participation in both for the other somewhat.
  4. Jakob_Knight

    USD 90.00 for a Sub I can't keep?

    You do realize generating threads for the purposes of inciting drama are grounds for permanent banning, I hope. Thus, you are either trying to pass off your own inability to understand the basic issue in the sale as a false deliberate act of trolling to salve your own ego and deflect the stigma of stupidity (and by doing so court much more serious consequences), or you are blatantly admitting that you knowingly engaged in an action you knew would get you banned for the purpose of some kind of cheap thrill. Either way, your post is detrimental to your situation, which does quite the opposite of improving people's impression of your intelligence from where it was prior. I suggest you maybe think harder in the future.
  5. Jakob_Knight

    USD 90.00 for a Sub I can't keep?

    The simple answer is that you shouldn't. The actual problem is that your title implies you chose to only see the sub (which you knew you wouldn't keep) as what you were buying rather than the containers which were the actual product being sold. So, by the terms of what you seem to be complaining about, WG should simply stick to selling containers and not include temporary extras so people who cannot understand that those extras -are- on top of what the actual product they are buying don't end up purchasing something that they don't want thinking it is something else because they want it to be that something and don't bother to read that it isn't. Ultimately, people make their purchases on their own decision making ability and priorities. If a person chooses to spend 90.00 USD to gain access to a submarine that they know they can't keep and 40 containers they don't want, then that's their decision to make. I don't see how they would think they have a leg to stand on if they complain about it later on (especially if they have already opened the containers), however, since WG has provided them exactly what was purchased and was known to be for sale by the buyer at the time of purchase in good faith. My two cents on this....question.
  6. Jakob_Knight

    What is the Point of Bridges?

    Actually, at the time they were constructed, they were. Portholes allowed spaces below decks to receive light from outside, but more importantly, they provided ventilation. Ships are basically big metal boxes. Any place inside them that doesn't have forced air movement becomes stagnant, and crews quarters were even worse. Add to that the effect of tropical sun on the deck, and the simplest solution when you don't have efficient ventilation for every compartment are portholes. Finally, remember portholes also had battle shutters, so they weren't completely open during combat.
  7. Jakob_Knight

    What is the Point of Bridges?

    Yup. Different decks, but the same Conning Tower structure. I don't have a pic of the actual hatchway, but here is the door to the Bridge level Conning Tower: Here is what it looks like inside that portion of the Conning Tower: Sorry it only shows a little of the compartment, but we were not allowed to go past the hatch, so this was the best I could get. Still, it shows how small an area it was in there, and why commanders probably stayed out of there more than they should have during battle. Edit: Now, imagine trying to command a squadron during battle, maybe at night, in that compartment and through those battle ports. Another reason why Captains were willing to risk themselves to see the area around them instead of staying safe in the Conning Tower.
  8. Jakob_Knight

    What is the Point of Bridges?

    That is indeed the New Jersey. However, I believe the top area there is actually for gun direction and spotting (note the brass-capped periscopes). The command crew area was below, with a similar armored door seen in this picture opening to the Bridge. When I get home, I'll try to post pictures of that. It's important to realize that navigating the ship was just as important in battle as when not sailing under fire. Ship collisions often did more damage than enemy fire, and to two ships. For that reason, it was important to keep awareness of what was going on around the ship, and windows were the only reliable way to do that. It is not unusual to hear the Bridge of a ship referred to as the Navigation Bridge to distinguish it from battle command areas or the Flag Bridge, giving clear indication as to the function of this part of the ship.
  9. Jakob_Knight

    CV Rework Feedback

    While I can see some of what you are saying, the above needs to be changed to "...and CV players who don't understand Carriers and want unimpeded ability to just sink ships without worrying about the other CV have been asking for this for a long time." as quite a few of us never expressed a desire for fighters to be removed (indeed, I was quite disgusted at the changes to USN CVs that eliminated the AS loadouts ). I think all true CV players know the purpose of a CV is control of the air. Anything else is just trying to make a CV into a BB. If you make them only surface action units, they might as well just be removed from the game, as they fill no other role that can't be done already in the game by other surface units.
  10. Jakob_Knight

    Why wasn't RDF included in CV CO skills?

    This is the strongest reason why it was likely unworkable for CVs. Carriers have the ability to switch vantage points from one unit to the next, with the player controlling both. The codework to have it work under those conditions isn't worth it as Carriers spend the majority of their gameplay in an overhead map where there is no place for the indicator. As well, having that ability on a plane would either allow pinpoint positioning due to plane speed and agility, or uselessly having the indicator bouncing wildly and giving no benefit. From a balance perspective, CVs already have more tools to spot enemy ships and direct their team to them than any other unit. As well, if a CV player would ever get any use from this skill, it would also mean they are someplace they shouldn't be, and should not complain if they let any enemy ship get that close without spotting them. A CV does not have the maneuverability to make use of it either. Lastly, there are already plenty of skills for CVs to take, and they don't need another skill they can't use effectively, don't want to be in a position where it could be used, and would only be beneficial to those CV captains who have messed up so badly that they deserve to be sunk instead of given a crutch to rely upon. My two cents.
  11. Jakob_Knight

    CV Rework Feedback

    A player's win rate is not an indication of how valid their insights onto a problem are. They require completely different aspects of activity, and many players who are team-oriented will have low win rates because the majority of players in the game are not ( so a player who sacrifices their ship to provide support to the other players all too often just ends up watching their efforts be wasted because those they are fighting alongside aren't fighting with the mindset of team gameplay). Instead, you should base your comments on their reasoning rather than on stat-shaming which is no basis at all. And please note that WOWS is not an e-sport game. The considerations of an e-sport game are not relevant to the discussion.
  12. Jakob_Knight

    CV Rework Feedback

    I can only speak for myself, but I would be playing CVs at least as much as my other three ship types if not for two things. First and foremost being the interface. There are only two options on the map when controlling your planes...too zoomed in to see what's going on around you or too far out to be able to control your planes in combat. If they had simply added in the ability to have variable zoom level, or at least an intermediate zoom level where we could see the situation and still have tactical control, I think at least a large portion of the players who don't like the interface would work with it. The second was the imbalance between the two CV lines. The IJN is given loadouts capable of locking out their USN counterpart while being largely free to operate themselves, considerably lower concealment ratings (hello Kaga), and flexible loadout options, where the USN's larger fighter flight groups are hampered by artificial nerfs to avoid allowing them to be the superior plane groups the balancing of the CVs assumes will be the case. I for one didn't need a complete change to the entire CV game in order to want to play CVs, but this is what we're getting. It remains to be seen if this change will result in any more long term CV players than are already playing them, and I believe that will more depend on how overpowered the devs make CVs.
  13. Jakob_Knight

    CV Rework Feedback

    Problem with increased AAA for CVs is that planes are the only real threat a CV will face, so it has to remain open to attack by them. Also, other units in the game are designated as having superior AAA, requiring that any AA that can make a CV nearly immune from attack would render those units truly immune from attack. I have a strong suspicion WG will not do that. The problem with a permanent CAP over a CV is that it would also provide an almost perfect defense against the only other realistic threat they face by spotting DDs and torpedoes before either would be a threat. Make no mistake, every aspect of the game is going to be impacted by this, not just AAA ratings. Ships were put into the game with how vulnerable or immune to air attack they were factored into their tier and against other ships they were matched against. Now, that calculation will be radically changed across the board. Ships may very well all be re-tiered by this, or ships may end up underperforming when they no longer serve their intended roles in the game. We'll have to wait and see, but if CVs have guaranteed strike capability, they will be overpowered. If they can be stopped by AAA, the CV players will claim they are not able to fight. The current gameplay, for all its faults, has balance in this, at least, but it's all being thrown in the garbage can to start from scratch. At the moment, I don't see how WG can make their plans work without inherent imbalances that will alienate either CV players or other ship drivers pretty strongly.
  14. Jakob_Knight

    CV Rework Feedback

    I suspect what they will eventually come up with will be similar to what we have now, with the CV player able to fight the Carrier when they have no planes in the air, and a 'return to base' button to allow a player in the cockpit to immediately force a return of his current planes and jump back into the Carrier. This will, of course, completely eliminate the idea of autopilot control as some kind of balance mechanic, but I think that's already a very weak counter for all the strengths they are giving CVs with this planned change.
  15. Jakob_Knight

    CV Rework Feedback

    To be fair, the most likely scenario under the current proposals will be that the CVs first action in the game will be to snipe the enemy CVs, as that will eliminate the only enemy capable of attacking the CV (which no longer has any reason to be near any enemy units), and the attack will have no chance of interception. Whichever CV survives will then simply damage farm the enemy until the last ship on their side is dead and the enemy can actually reach them. As for the autopilot, most CV players already use the autopilot as they are too busy managing their planes to be able to control their ship from the Bridge (with the sole exceptions of groundings and when faced with the need to dodge torpedoes). This change really isn't much more than what ninety percent of current gameplay is for CVs in regards to controlling the ship, so no real sacrifice in most situations.