• Content count

    10,780
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    23433

Community Reputation

3,028 Superb

About issm

  • Rank
    Admiral
  • Birthday
  • Portal profile issm

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Portal profile issm

Recent Profile Visitors

1,686 profile views
  1. Nothing wrong with cooperation. But when it tuns to defending people just because they're on your side....
  2. Because some of us like the freedom to casually play when, what, and how we like, instead of being obliged to meet the requirements of a group? I don't expect WG to remove it; unfortunately humans have the urge to ruin everything with the tribalism that lost it's value during the industrial revolution.
  3. Because group play isn't fun for anyone but that group.
  4. Eh...... Leaning towards not really liking this change. I don't buy their excuses either: Neither of them are class based, and the class that is made the most "uncomfortable", by fires, battleships, don't get buffed. If the goal is to improve cruiser and destroyer gameplay, why are they doing it by nerfing DoTs, when the main threat to both is alpha? I also don't like their decision to apply this buff to all tiers. High tier cruisers don't really need the help, and all it really does is close off build diversity.
  5. Yeah, let's just ignore the 53% players divisioning for 60% W/R, or the 60%ers divisoning for 70%+. Match rigging doesn't always mean rigging to win. You can also rig to lose. I don't care what your intentions are, that's what you're doing. Oh, you want to bring up personal stats? I'm just mad because I can't win? So that must be why I have a 60% 7 day solo W/R, while yours is (with generous rounding) 54%. Even with 3man divs, you only hit 56%. Oh, now I see why you defend divisions so vehemently, you need 3 man divs to pull your performance up to do what better players like me can do solo. Protip: Don't bring up personal stats to attack people unless you have the stats to back it up. When no actual points are available, be a grammar nazi.
  6. You want realism, go and play an actual naval sim, like..... oh, wait, there aren't any, because no one friggen wants one.
  7. WG's CEO did an interview a while back in which he estimated that they had 25-30% monetisation rate. The interview didn't say anything about how much each person spent, but looking at WG's pricing and applying the Pareto Principle, it would be reasonable to assume that 80% of WG's revenue comes from ~5% of the playerbase, the other %20 of their revenue comes from ~20% of the overall playerbase, and the remaining 75% are totally free players.
  8. Let's see, a division is a way allowed by the game's rules in which you can increase your chances of winning over that of people playing alone. This fact is basically confirmed by the fact that unicums almost universally have much better division stats than solo stats. You can like and want divisions, but call a spade a spade: It's legal match rigging, just like mods are legal hacks. You want to play with friends fairly? Make your own matches, or play in a groups only queue. Keep your garbage out of solo queue.
  9. And yet, "BUT MUH HOOD" doesn't lose credibility, despite it being functionally the exact same? Or are you so pathetically shallow that you'll happily overlook the deaths of hundreds of people so long as they aren't specifically mentioned?
  10. Killing hundreds of people is totaly ok..... as long as it's in a war! And look at you! So eager to nitpick the differences between different forms of killing people, just so you can use one type of killing hundreds of people to prove some inane point about a video game, while saying that bringing up other forms of killing people is unacceptable. You want to play with sweeping generalisations? Pro-det people only care about labels, not mechanics. You people are some of the shallowest people I've ever had the displeasure of seeing. Show me the naval battle where aircraft carriers from 2 opposing fleets were in direct support of surface action (While also fighting each other) while the destroyers could routinely sneak within 6 km of enemies without being spotted and battleships played peek-a-boo with islands. Then I'll acknowledge that this game has anything to do with real naval battles. I won't hold my breath. WoWS has nothing to do with naval battles other than name and appearance. Because that's the one with video, and I just wanted to share how stunningly realistic this game is. Sure, I misread you. It happens. And? You know what's really funny? You take what was essentially a side note meant to highlight how utterly unrealistic the game is - using what (I thought) you said only as a bridge - and turned it into 90% of your response. Almost seems like you don't have anything to say about your stunning hypocrisy around killing people, or the fact that you can't contest the fact that WoWS throws reality completely out the window in the vast majority of cases.
  11. And this is essentially irrelevant. Sure, this might be true in terms of base mechanics, but what are you going to do? Going head-on when your bow can be overmatched is stupid regardless, since you just give people an easy straight shot at citadeling you through your bow. Are you going to go more broadside? But then, the risk of eating broadside cit-pens vastly outweighs the risk of detonation, given the 10% cap and generally tiny target magazines represent. The only option you're left with is what you should be doing anyway - stay angled. I'll give you the courtesy of responding in full when you earn it. It's easy to assume the entire point is meaningless when you lead with something that's obviously untrue. The second bit is better addressed later on anyway. No, they don't do both, they fail at both. The 10% det chance cap combined with the small target you have to hit to even roll means that detonations will never be as much of a deterrent as normal damage. And guess what? Normal damage mechanics already do that. This is another situation in which detonation would be fine.... IF it were limited to this one situation. Thing is, it isn't. It can just as easily knock someone who's taken a single, highly survivable bad shell out of the game. If this mechanic doesn't add anything in the situations in which it's supposedly the most important, but has drawbacks elsewhere, that's a net negative for the mechanic. Upon re-reading, sure, I misread it the first time. Which brings us back to the original subject: I argued that the chance of actually hitting the magazine is minuscule, to which you reply "shells that hit the magazine have a higher chance of detonating". At best, that's a non-sequitur. You don't make any argument in favour of the idea that you can reliably aim for a battleship's magazines - which was the original point. It also means that most of the time, the cost to me will be minimal. You obsess over the fact that you might take 60/80/100k damage, while I instead focus on the fact that most of the time, Ill get away with it with less than 20k. Which brings us to your unwarranted assumption: That everyone weighs risk the same way you do. This is also why I bring up expected reward. The amount of risk you're willing to take on depends on the reward you expect at the end of it. Offer me a full HP as a potential prize, and I might be less averse to taking on risk than if I was offered a BB with less HP than myself. a predicted utility value for one of several options, calculated as the sum of the utility of every possible outcome each multiplied by the probability of its occurrence. Hey, what a coincidence, isn't that what I've been doing all along, while you've been ignoring the probabilities of occurrence? Yet statistically, plane shootdown numbers at T10 are pretty "meh", even for ships with great potential AA. Hindenburg has Des Moines tier AA, yet, pathetic average shootdowns. Gearing's AA is comparable to Grozovoi, yet it shoots down 1 less plane per match, an average. Sure, you might know people who run AA builds - but looking at stats, nothing to suggest that AA builds are super common. Just about the only ship where AA builds are common are Neptune and Minotaur, and, be serious, what other useful builds are there? I format my posts to be legible on my crappy 4:3 second monitor. Deal with it.
  12. i.e., it's a game, and that's what the code says should happen. There are no explosives hitting metal, hence, why splash damage can be arbitrarily changed from dealing HP damage to not dealing HP damage.