Jump to content


Beta Testers
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

  • Clan


Community Reputation

585 Excellent

About Jakob_Knight

  • Rank
    Lieutenant Junior Grade
  • Insignia

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

1 Follower

Recent Profile Visitors

466 profile views
  1. T-61 looks broken and overpowered?

    She's interesting, but Shinonome is similar, and Hatsuharu is stealthier and faster, so it's not totally overpowered when compared to other DDs in its Tier. Powerful? Yes, but slow and probably won't spot much before she's spotted in turn. She also has the capability of facing radar ships, which she'll have to enter possible Radar range to fight. All in all, a boat that should do well, but I think not that OP that she can't be met and engaged effectively. My two cents.
  2. Notser babbling about "UI Scaling"

    Then again, RobertVictor68 asking incoherently about it does show that not all players are aware this is an issue with some players. Good to have some info so it doesn't happen as often, I suppose.

    Seven Shimas meet seven Gearings. Who wins? Seven Shimas meet five Gearings and two Des Moines with Radar Mods. Who wins? Seven Shims meet four Gearings, two Worcesters, and a Moskva with Radar mods. Who wins? Seven Shimas meet...well, why go on? Simple fact is that battles are determined by the players and what they come into a battle prepared for. Seven-DD teams have their own problems, and are not inherently a winning combination any more than any other combination. I think the OP's Clan needs to work on their team play and preparedness, not trying to change the game because it's too hard for them. My two cents.
  4. WGC isn't reason to ragequit

    Of course, there are also always going to be a 'Change is Good' crowd. Funny how, when they lose their job, crash their car, come down with an illness that leaves them unable to get out of bed, have all of their life savings stolen, or lose a family member, we don't hear about how great they feel about their lives changing. Change to something that works has a high probability to result in something that does not work, as you are changing a working item for something else. Change, by definition, is usually bad, as the pre-change state is usually viable, so any change to that has many more non-viable outcomes than the certainty of viability by not changing. Thus, the entire concept that change is, fundamentally, a good thing is ludicrous, and the sign of bad reasoning.
  5. Podcast Listener QnA

    Hey. Always make this podcast a must-download every week and I highly recommend any WOWS players who haven't tuned in to do so. My question is...we hear endless discussions about balance, and we know CVs are undergoing a fundamental change to how they play in-game. Do you believe it is practically possible to achieve 'balance' between CVs and other units without this change, and if not, how many aspects of the game will what we've been shown of the proposed change impact beyond Carrier play itself? Thanks for all the work you guys do every week!
  6. Great job as always, Mouse! Loved the pics! I will say I get some great laughs when people under rate the Hatsuharu. Everyone gravitates to the Fubuki for the extra three torpedoes, and that does have its place. However, I'll take Hatsuharu any day of the week, because compared to Fubuki it is... * faster * stealthier * more agile * better AA and gunpower Yes, many will say the differences aren't big, but I can tell you how much of a 'small' different exists between them based on my gameplay the last time we had a T6 Ranked season. The difference is between a dead Fubuki that got spotted and couldn't run away or fight off other DDs, and a live Hatsuharu that remained undetected and had the gunpower to at least give other DDs pause or run away. So, take that for what it's worth and choose what you prefer. I prefer a DD that's better at everything I need to survive and remain a credible threat, and the Hatsuharu delivers on that.
  7. For the first two points, you are making the case that, because a few Cruisers do not have DF and a few Destroyers are specialized to be able to have decent AAA (though not to the levels Cruisers of the same tier are capable of), this is proof that Cruisers are not equipped to fight Carriers specifically and that Destroyers are fully capable of defeating Carrier planes that come near them. You are ready to make that statement as indicative of your beliefs in the shiptypes and their overall state in the game? Because, I know I was taking into account both the shiptypes from their development across the lifetime of the game and the qualities most common among classes with those shiptypes rather than basing my observations and conclusions on the few exceptions that are noted -as- exceptions, and find a different opinion than that. I would next restate that CVs do not hard counter cruisers, for the reasons I have already stated. They do, indeed, hard counter DDs, but many BBs have sufficient AAA to hurt a CVs squadrons, even if they cannot stop them entirely. A soft counter, but definitely not a hard counter when taken with the ability of the BB to survive the CVs attacks and place the CV in a similar situation as soon as the CV is spotted. How are ships supposed to defend themselves? By using tactics such as combining their AAA, maneuvering, and putting the enemy planes under attack by your own. A CV remains the only unit type that you know you will have an equal unit to oppose it with -and- will not face more than one or two of in any battle. Now, am I saying CVs don't need work? No one who knows anything about this game would say that. However, the issue here is about Radar, not CVs. And, since CVs are designed to do the things everyone claims Radar is needed for, they are part of this discussion as-is. Finally, you ask what the other hard counters are. CVs and Hydro are hard counters because they strip away what DDs need to both survive and be combat effective, and the DD can take no effective action against them. A spotter/seaplane fighter and CLs are soft counters because a DD, while at a disadvantage, an take actions that may defeat them.
  8. CVs are not a hard counter to Cruisers, which can tear apart a CV's planes with DF (even those with low AAA can cause serious damage to planes with that). Cruisers can fight on better than even terms against a CV, and corner it. Then, it's over with the CV unable to do much except hope for a lucky hit with its bombers (much like a Cruiser having to hope to burn down a Battleship with fire). A BB can mount significant AAA firepower to fight back against air attack, but they will take damage. On the other hand, they have the HP and heals to not be sunk by anything but a full strike and their guns can reach the enemy CV if it gets spotted. By comparison, a DD has neither the AAA firepower to hurt an aircraft squadron nor the HP to survive the attack. And, the CV can simply keep the planes spotting the DD, removing what the DD relies upon to survive. So, no. CVs are not a hard counter to anything but DDs, and that counter is more absolute than any other in the game. As to the scarcity of CVs, that is entirely the fault of the players, as are those BBs who choose not to adapt their actions for DD attack or Cruisers who insist on showing a BB their broadsides constantly. If players choose not to play CVs, then any imbalance to the intended system is on their shoulders as well. And I can say that a majority of games I have played recently in the T5-T6 ranges have had CVs, so someone is going off old data or just assuming people don't play CVs. Regardless, the case still stands that there are more hard counters against DDs in the game than Radar. Nerfing it won't result in that changing.
  9. How a player who has played DDs as much as Xlap has can make such a statement, I don't understand. A DD facing a CV faces the hardest counter in the game, and every DD has to be wary of that in even more drastic a way than a BB has to against a DD. At least the BB can sink the DD...the DD is all but helpless against the CV's planes, regardless of actions possible by the DD. So, yes. In addition to other DDs, a DD faces a hard counter from CVs that is far more one sided than any other ship type matchup in the game. That doesn't include that CAs (which are supposed to be the hard counter to CVs) are also equipped to counter them with hydro (which can strip away smoke and spot torpedoes long before they become a real threat) and the maneuverability to defeat them. In light of this, how could removal of Radar (not included in the above) at all stop DDs from having a counter when they already face more hard counters than any other ship type -before- Radar is even considered?
  10. Haida Has Arrived

    I suppose we can all be grateful the devs made this a T7, so Mouse didn't have to choose between running Haida and Warspite. I think there might have been a serious chance of the universe cracking in half had that happened (at least until WG finds a way to put out a Warspite with Canadian registry).
  11. I think it's important for WG to consider introducing ships with significant history to them into the game. Whether they are a clone or not is really not the issue....it's the significance of the ship and its place in the naval history of its country. Having served in the United States Navy, I have a very keen respect for every ship and the connection that is forged between them and the crews who serve on them. A ship is not just a collection of machinery, equipment, and fuel that is collected and contained within a metal hull....it becomes home and a symbol to men and women who sail upon and depend upon them, and a very real entity unique in the things Mankind invents and builds. We don't give names to our cars or our steel mills, but every ship gets some form of name (by their crews if not by their nation), and that connection continues through to the people connected to the crews. When a ship has done something noteworthy, the name of that ship bears the stigma or honor of that deed beyond its lifetime, and other ships the succeed it carry the legacy of the name they bear. And, when a ship is referred to, we always say 'The Iowa', or 'The Hood'. A note of the singularity of identity of each ship and its significance. Talk to someone about 'the train' and they'll nod, but talk to them about 'the Enterprise', and it comes with far, far more significance. It doesn't matter if a ship has the same stats as another ship of its class when brought into the game. It doesn't matter if Washington were to be brought in with the -exact- same abilities as an Alabama or a Massachusetts....what matters is that players who value the significance of the ship will be sailing -Washington-, and see its name blazing across the battle summary and have her registry number there on the bow. So yes, completely support this. Bring back more honorable ships from the depths of naval history, and let their stories live again on the digital seas and the minds of those who may never have heard of the deeds and efforts of their crews.
  12. Best tech tree tier 6 cruiser?

    I don't think any T6 tech tree cruiser does everything well. I just know Aoba has always let me feel I have a shot at anything I come up against, and is just a very good all-around ship. If I am confronted by a Battleship, I know I have torpedoes that can reach out and kill it. If I am confronted by another Cruiser, I have the 203s. If I come up against a Destroyer, I have the gunpower and catapult plane to make them worry. If I come up against a Carrier, I have Defensive Fire and a fighter of my own to make things rough for them. If I find I'm outgunned, or needed on the other side of the battle, I have the speed to do what I need to do. All in all, I can't think of a T6 tech tree Cruiser I feel more comfortable taking into battles.
  13. Best tech tree tier 6 cruiser?

    My go-to T6 Cruiser is Aoba. Fast and reasonably stealthy, she can handle just about anything. Torpedoes for Battleships, heavy guns for Cruiser and Destroyer work, and while her AAA isn't great, Carriers can't ignore it either. Since the removal of Cleveland, this is my choice. Leander gets my second choice here.
  14. Leaving Early Penalty

    As it should be in such a situation, especially given the advantages Carriers enjoy when they are not deplaned. However, the core issue is that none of those rare instances happen at all unless the CV captain is there to try.
  15. Leaving Early Penalty

    OP sounds like so many who give up when things don't go their way. I'm sure many of us have seen these players in our games, who don't want to play unless the battle is in their favor. As has been said, even a ship that has lost their main weapons can affect the outcome. If the enemy ignores you, you get to cap. If the enemy spends time and attacks sinking you, they aren't spending time and attacks on your teammates. If you get close to the enemy, you still have AAA and secondaries to help your teammates, and can even ram. At the least, you are another pair of eyes to spot the enemy. So, no. You don't get to run away and claim you aren't hurting your team and don't deserve a penalty. Run in, cause what trouble you can, and take what happens with some degree of sportsmanship. After all, you got yourself into that situation, and you don't lose anything you weren't ready to give up when you queued up for the battle.