Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

  • Clan


Community Reputation

2,922 Superb

About Kombat_W0MBAT

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Houston, TX
  • Interests
    When I'm not at work doing engineering stuff (or online playing WoWS), I spend most of my time with my wife, at the gym, or out enjoying God's beautiful creation.

Recent Profile Visitors

4,693 profile views
  1. Repair Party restores HP over a period of time. It doesn't put out fires or stop floods. Damage Control Party removes fire/flood DoTs and fixes incapacitated modules. You're also immune to additional DoTs while it's active. It doesn't restore HP.
  2. End Situational Awareness

    Removing SA entirely would wreck how many ships play. Not saying that change is always a bad thing, but, in this case, it's a terrible idea. For instance, ships like Zao and Minotaur rely heavily on stealth to be effective. If you're waiting for inbound shells to tell you that you're spotted, it's too late. Even battleships rely on it. If you have a 12km detection radius, and you're spotted while not firing, there's a good chance you need to start taking evasive maneuvers or call for support to find the DD that's stalking you.
  3. End Situational Awareness

    And how does this argument not apply to current captain skills that "everyone" takes, like Priority Target? It does. Removing pieces of information that allow you to make strategic decisions in game is removing depth.
  4. End Situational Awareness

    Not really. Everyone took it anyway. And those that didn't probably don't know how to use it effectively. The number of strategic decisions you can make based on when you're detected vs when you're not is too many to count. So many ships rely on knowing when they're spotted to be effective, and it's a fundamental information element to the game. It will never be removed.
  5. End Situational Awareness

    Removing SA would remove depth from the game.
  6. You created this topic because of how a bad player affected you. This is a vent thread. Stop sounding like an altruist who is only concerned with "the team". So what? Afks, bots, and tk'ers are a problem. Being bad at the game isn't. This game needs a healthy population of players, including all those players you want to filter out. If you want a true competitive mode, go play clan battles or KotS.
  7. You're being equally (if not more) selfish by thinking that other people should abstain from playing a game because of how it affects YOU. Being bad at the game, while aggravating to their peers, doesn't somehow disqualify an individual from playing this game. My guess is that the majority of the playerbase isn't even aware of stat tracking sites with which they can monitor and asses their performance. In short, get over yourself.
  8. Shamed by a Stat Padder

    The sooner you can ignore mean things said by people you don't know on the internet, the better off you'll be.
  9. Bud, this is a game. People aren't obligated to meet some arbitrary criteria to play... a GAME. Stop thinking this is the Olympics.
  10. Topics like this are fruitless and entirely relative. Also, below average players make up roughly half the population. Suggesting they not play randoms is dumb and a bit of a paradox statistically speaking.
  11. The exact same thing happened with Asashio. People were screaming "OP!" because it has double the average damage of other T8 DDs, but its WR is fairly average. The quality of damage dealt is more important than the raw damage numbers.
  12. That tends to happen when an experienced player swims in the waters of protected MM. Shame!!! Joking aside, some people legitimately prefer the playstyle of low tiers. Not my cup of tea, but more power to you! 79% is solid.
  13. I agree with much that has been said in terms of data samples. Hence, in the original post I stated, "assuming a large number of games and widespread access to players" which cuts out a lot of outliers such as Flint, Black, Alabama ST, and so forth. The question in the poll primarily relates to ships that are either tech tree ships, freebies, or commonly available premiums. For example, the Belfast, even though it isn't a tech tree ship, has a sizable number of games (due to its popularity and duration of access) from which some conclusions can be drawn. In my opinion... Regardless, I wholeheartedly agree that WR% is not THE defining metric. It is simply A metric that can lead us to additional questions about the balance of a ship. Good responses.