Jump to content

Desertfox51

Beta Testers
  • Content Сount

    372
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    9884
  • Clan

    [ZR]

Community Reputation

832 Excellent

About Desertfox51

  • Rank
    Master Chief Petty Officer
  • Insignia

Recent Profile Visitors

791 profile views
  1. Last time I checked we are playing an arcade shooter and not a naval sim. This, gameplay is more important then historical accuracy. But hay if you wanna go down this route, then CVs should pretty much detonate anytime they’re hit by large caliber shells cause of all the fuel and munitions. Next anytime a plane drops a torpedo while flying too high and or going to fast, the torpedo will be destroyed when it hits the water.
  2. A step in the right direction, the rocket planes have no place in this game.
  3. You another patch another step in the right direction
  4. The answer was/is/and will always be no. Indirect fire is not fun to play against, and will never be balanced because of that.
  5. Hahaha you can’t compare a digital good to a physical good. One degrades overtime, the other does not. You are ruled by a lack of logic, the ideal live service customer
  6. Lol. I’m ruled by logic, why would I buy a digital good when at any moment the worth of that good can go down.
  7. Bitter about what? I’ve never bought a perma camo before because I’m afraid of them nerfing the ship. I also think it’s a waste of gold even if they don’t nerf them.
  8. Yes, and that’s also why I will never by perma camo. Since in any patch that ship you but the perma camo on could all of a sudden be worthless.
  9. Desertfox51

    10.3 CV nerfs still suck

    CVs have not been nerfed enough, they need more nerfs just like with what’s happening to the Thunderer and Stalingrad
  10. Desertfox51

    Thunderer and Stalingrad Nerfed Again

    Unbelievable that they are nerfing them again and yet they haven’t nerfed CVs.
  11. Or better yet just get rid of CVs, so no player has to see them.
  12. Desertfox51

    So nerfs to premium ships huh?

    Agreed, along with having the T8 premium ships being in such a point where they get special MM like the IS6. Would be really nice to have a T8 that doesn’t see T10.
  13. Desertfox51

    So nerfs to premium ships huh?

    The bait and switch was how WG used the GC to sell loot boxes because that was the only way to get it after being removed. Then a few months later WG comes out and says how they are looking into upturning the ship because people complain it’s op. But the only reason people bought those boxes was because the ship was op at tier5. Thus trying to pull a bait and switch. and people spent real money with the sole purpose of getting these ships. Sure it was indirectly but people who were not planing on spending money, definitely changed there minds once they say the ships where being removed. This is a scummy business practice that shouldn’t be defended
  14. Desertfox51

    So nerfs to premium ships huh?

    Classic WG just like with the GC. Use an OP ship as bait to get people to spend money indirectly to get it, then nerf it once the money has been spent. Such a scummy tactic, this is not acceptable.
  15. Desertfox51

    WG, Make the Lower Tiers Great Again

    You want me to play tiers 6-4 again? Remove CVs. It’s not fun playing ships that have 0 AA when you constantly go up against 2 CVs most of the time.
×