Jump to content


  • Content Сount

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

  • Clan


Community Reputation

46 Neutral

About The_Communist_Tsar

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

695 profile views
  1. The_Communist_Tsar

    Uh huh - Italian BB Tier V

    They could have easily gave it a hypothetical refit where the Italians didn't go all in on a complete rebuild. Keep the 120mm casemate's and add a new superstructure. Keep the 12" guns instead of re-boring them, etc. That would have required effort though... And we've all seen how WG treats the Italian ships in the game...
  2. The_Communist_Tsar

    Where is the reserve?

    No I think the OP is referring to the universal captain reserve we use to have prior to the update. It was a place where we could view all of our captains regardless of nation and even do resets if I recall correctly.
  3. The_Communist_Tsar

    Did anyone test this patch?

    Nevermind not testing it. Some of the skills just flat out show that WG developers have literally no fundamental understanding of their own game. 5% increased AP damage at the cost of always being on fire/flooding. ...What? Decreasing BB dispersion as long as they passively snipe. Surely this will help with passive battleship gameplay! ...What? Trading most of the survivability skills to gain a pitiful buff to secondary guns ensuring that you won't live long enough to brawl in most situations. ...What? WG's competence has been in steady decline for several updates now and they are completely unwilling to heed any sensible advice from anyone in their community. This is basically how they are developing their game now: 1.) Think of a change they want to make that no one has asked for. 2.) Add it to the game. 3.) Throw it at Superesters to see if it works without giving them enough time to properly test anything. 4.) Find out that their ideas are terrible/in need of serious rework. 5.) Ignore all feedback. 6.) Add garbage changes to live server.
  4. The_Communist_Tsar

    Shots landing short!!!

    Same here. Waterline shots are basically guaranteed to give you no reliable return. Most of the citadels I have gotten have been from vertical dispersion carrying the shells a little further to where I actually aimed them to begin with. Didn't think WG's inept roll-out of 0.10.0 could get any worse. Seems that they really rolled out the red carpet of garbage with this update.
  5. The_Communist_Tsar

    The reality of AA fire in WWII

    Yes it should be substantially better than what it currently is. WoWS is a video game. It has no simulator elements. This is a game where carriers can service aircraft in mere seconds and the CV's themselves operate within gun range of battleships. Surface ships need better AA to prevent carriers from being as powerful as they currently are. There are currently very few ships that can contest a carrier at the moment which severely hampers gameplay for 95% of players.
  6. The_Communist_Tsar

    What the WG statement REALLY means

    Yeah, this kind of corporate sleaze was very calculated. Behind the scenes they already have a scapegoat lined up for when their greed backfires (someone visible to the community so it can be made to look like WG accepts accountability). Shouldn't surprise anyone who has followed gaming related media for the past decade. Game prices have been increasing for no reason other than corporate profit and microtransactions are the easiest way to cheat loyal players out of money. You also have to consider the fact that these decisions are made with nothing but profit in mind. WG doesn't care if they receive a massive amount of backlash. If the event turns a profit it's deemed a success. You can except more of the same until regulation steps in to make this kind of predatory practice illegal within the industry.
  7. The_Communist_Tsar

    ST 0.9.10, Italian Battleships

    I would like to give you the benefit of the doubt. However, the recent controversy involving the AL Littorio simply being an exact reskin of the Roma indicates that they might just be lazy/incompetent. Your comment about Kongō really points to an entirely different issue with WG. Kongō is one of the oldest models in the game and is in desperate need of a ground up remodel (along with at least 70% of the existing IJN assets currently in game).
  8. The_Communist_Tsar

    ST 0.9.10, Italian Battleships

    The laziness doesn't stop there. Just look at Vittorio and compare the model to Roma's in-game model. You'll quickly realise that they couldn't even be bothered to properly model the appropriate superstructure or bow for Vittorio.
  9. The_Communist_Tsar

    Constant Disconnects after Match

    Having the same issues mentioned in this thread. I reside in AB and have Telus as my ISP. Haven't had it boot me during a game yet, but it has kicked me out while in MM and at the end of a match. Never experienced this problem before the most recent WoWS update and no other online game is acting up. I find it hard to believe that this is simply a coincidence.
  10. The_Communist_Tsar

    Buff T3-4 Ships AA already

    What I find bizarre about the current state of some AA at tier IV is that WG have deliberately ignored historical AA configurations. Alberto da Giussano should be equipped with 37mm Breda AA mounts and 13.2mm heavy machine guns. Instead of giving the ship an AA configuration that would have reasonable values at tier IV; (and a range buff to 3.5km for mid-range) WG has instead given it nothing but 20mm's. Wyoming should probably receive the Arkansas refit AA (most American BB's need to receive their historical AA to emphasise their supposed "flavour" in that department). There is probably an equal number of clubbing CV players at tier IV as there are new/inexperienced CV players at the moment. Cruiser players learn very early on that sailing full broadside is not advisable, why should CV players not be taught early on that flying carelessly is not advisable either?
  11. Oh look, a straw man fallacy! At no point did the OP state that they wanted German BB's to be generic. The implication of the OP's post is that German BB's have suffered from power-creep. The line has not received the developer attention required to mitigate some of their more dated attributes.
  12. The_Communist_Tsar

    My thoughts on Italian Cruisers

    Overall, they have potential but are severely hampered by several limitations. Armour Piercing Shells Italian CA's currently lack any advantage in AP alpha compared to other CA's. The Germans lead the pack with 5,900 AP alpha on their higher tier 8" guns. The Japanese CA's have 4,700 on their 8" guns until Zao which receives a massive AP alpha increase to 5,400. The American CA's have 4,600 AP alpha on their mid-tier CA's and 5,000 on higher-tier CA's (they also have far better AP performance due to superior ricochet angles and heavy AP shells). The Italians have 4,700 alpha on mid-tiers and 4,800 on the rest of the line. The Italians also have abysmal DPM owing to their sub-par reload speeds (which is truly pathetic on their 6" gun cruisers at tier IV and V). To be honest, I'm completely fine with the reload rate of Italian 8" guns (the 6" guns need a significant reload buff and turret rotation increase). The issue I have is with the AP alpha which is nothing special. WG could easily buff the AP alpha on the mid-tiers to at least 5,000 (Trento and Zara) and the high-tier 8" guns to 5,400 or even 5,500. This would hardly make them overpowered because this massive alpha buff would still be limited by the long reload. This buff would emphasize using the Italian cruiser speed and exhaust smoke consumable to position yourself accordingly and deliver high damage AP salvos into the enemy. Detectability Range by Air One of my biggest gripes with the line is their terrible detectability range for aircraft. This really limits the Italian cruisers ability to position themselves in CV games. There really is no reason for this weakness for the line, especially when you look at their surface detection which is not great, but not terrible. Italian AA is also mediocre at best and is incredibly short range which makes the problem even worse. Air detectability needs to be buffed. The Positives The introduction of Italian cruisers did not immediately powercreep the other cruiser lines in the game which is nice. Their agility is good and when a speed flag is equipped they can easily catch some DD players off-guard with their excellent top speed. The exhaust smoke consumable allows Italian cruisers to quickly retreat from a bad situation, harass enemy ships from concealment, position themselves on the enemies flank undetected, or even rush certain enemy ships that are unsupported and finish them with torpedoes (I managed to do this to a Bayern yesterday). My opinion of the line is based off of playing the Amalfi and Genova. I can't bring myself to try the tier V. Although I enjoy a good challenge, the terrible reload rate, poor turret traverse, and lackluster alpha would probably frustrate me too much.
  13. The_Communist_Tsar

    Russian bias and the sad state of Italian Cruisers

    The situation with Kron is an interesting one when you consider what it could have been, compared to what it ended up being. Kron's model doesn't even have radar modeled, yet it received radar allowing it to counter DD's. Azuma and Alaska both have 20 second reloads, but for some reason, Kron has an 18.5 second reload. Why? WG had the opportunity to debut the large cruiser's as a sub-class that would be weak to DD's (large size, larger turning circle, possibly more vulnerable to DD torpedoes), but instead they gave Kron the means to counter the one class that should have been better against this type of ship. Kron also has the arbitrary DPM advantage despite not needing one compared to Azuma and Alaska. Yes I know that Alaska also has radar, but my point is that Kron could have set a precedent that large cruisers would have increased vulnerability to DD's, but instead they threw radar at a ship that had no need for it (happens to be VMF), and then they had to give the same treatment to the USN for obvious reasons. Note: I'm leaving Stalingrad out of this debate entirely because I feel that she's a separate beast and a total outlier. I'm focusing on the tier IX FXP ships.
  14. The_Communist_Tsar

    Russian bias and the sad state of Italian Cruisers

    Point taken, thanks for your input (As a side note, it's nice to finally experience/witness a forum interaction that hasn't immediately devolved into ad-hominem attacks, even though we have expressed a difference of opinion). Native Russian speakers having ready access to Russian archives really is something I should have put more thought into. So allow me to make a slight adjustment to my previous statement. I guess the reason I may seem a bit bitter about the whole thing is the representation of the Regia Marina cruiser line. I've noted several glaring historical issues with the three cruisers that I was looking forward to the most and it kind of feels like WG dropped the ball when it comes to their research and modeling. From my point of view it just seems that more care/attention is paid to the Soviet vessels, however this may just simply have been a series of honest mistakes. I'm willing to accept that, but I feel like WG needs to meet me (and the community) half-way on some of these complaints. Hoping you understand my sentiment on this.
  15. The_Communist_Tsar

    Russian bias and the sad state of Italian Cruisers

    Isn't spending a disproportionate amount of time developing one nation at the expense of other, more historically significant and relevant navies a form of bias though (just curious, not trying to be passive-aggressive or anything)? It's also, in my opinion, not just the number of VMF ships being added to the game, it's also how they're balanced. Look at what happened with Poltava recently. The ship was underwhelming at tier VIII, so WG did not waste time trying to shove it into a tier that didn't fit the characteristics of the ship. They immediately down-tiered it and reworked the entire play-style to make it better. This kind of development time and consideration is rarely (if at all) applied to other premiums. Just look at the recent addition of Viribus Unitis and Yahagi.