Jump to content


  • Content Сount

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

  • Clan


Community Reputation

72 Good

About SonicAnatidae

  • Rank
    Chief Petty Officer
  • Insignia

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

731 profile views
  1. SonicAnatidae

    Some guy throwing Ranked Games

    Some of us shave with Occam's razor. Regardless of Ahskance's ability or inability to deliver results, this isn't a new issue with this player. This isn't about Ahskance, it's about WG. He represents them in a specific way, but it's not like he can go knock on the CEO's door and insist on action. His is limited by his role. While this is certainly in his bailiwick and I don't doubt that he will take action, WG has to listen and act on it. This player has been reported repeatedly. That's a reasonable assumption with this game and how players get triggered over the silliest garbage. This player is still playing and ruining other people's games What else needs to be said?
  2. I can't speak on the engine sounds, but I do know that they put so much motor and fuel into the torps that the armament is essentially the core of a hand grenade.
  3. SonicAnatidae

    Some guy throwing Ranked Games

    And I guess my real point is, it never should have gotten there and it did because no one cares or the people that do care aren't empowered.
  4. SonicAnatidae

    Some guy throwing Ranked Games

    This is determined by a number of things already available to them. Metrics, review of tickets, etc. This is how support managers, helpdesk directors, etc. determine if their teams are effective, need more resources, need process changes, etc. It's the feedback support mgmt uses daily, assuming they actually do the job. It's all there already. "Making" a case is simply the Support manager doing their job. I know, I do a very, very similar job. Support is traditionally given less than needed because it's a cost, not a profit center, but what a lot of companies forget is support is part of the product they happily sold you. I get your point, but I'm saying that this information is there. What appears to be lacking is the will to address it.
  5. SonicAnatidae

    Some guy throwing Ranked Games

    First, the in-game reporting system is meaningless. I know this because I main CVs and get neg karma for joining a game. You learn to ignore it. It counts for nothing, nothing about the karma system impacts support. It's there to make someone feel a sense of accomplishment when they Neg Karma someone. That's it. It's a handjob for the player to feel like they have an impact on a player's trolling. It doesn't have any impact whatsoever, to be clear. Second, while you may not have sent in tickets for this "poo poo head", a lot of people have I'm sure. People in this game get triggered over the silliest crap. There is no realistic scenario where WG support doesn't know about this clown, yet here we are. It's all moot anyway, because even if Ahskance brings down the ban hammer with prejudice, no one will ever know, because of data protection laws, that somehow apply to support tickets, but rarely apply to storage of user PPI/PCI.
  6. SonicAnatidae

    Some guy throwing Ranked Games

    I disagree. Poor support has been present for more than this outlier. This specific case may be an outlier, but what does that say about the "support" team? It should not require special intervention by a CM to address the obvious issue with this player. We all know they have been reported multiple times. FFS, they are infamous for this garbage. We also know they have been reported multiple times, sometimes with recordings, sometimes with screenshots, sometimes with just text. After a large number of people have submitted a ticket regarding the same person, for the same garbage, it's going to require a CM to intervene to issue them what, a 3-day chat ban, because they spend a lot? I've spent a considerable amount over the years in WoT and WoWs, so where's my special cookie? Nowhere? Yeah, I couldn't find it either. So, I can't get a simple answer from WG Support that makes sense on any planet, but we're supposed to believe they are responsive to issues like this? lol That sounds like a support team that's apathetic or not empowered and neither is how support is done. Again, we're in my bailiwick when it comes to support teams and WG support mostly sucks. <-- period To be clear, I don't doubt that you can get it addressed. Fantastic, but should we bring every ticket to you or Boggz? No, we shouldn't because you're here for exceptions, however, with support being so apathetic, the only way to get anything more than "8 secs of effort" from support requires intervention and that's a problem. Until that's addressed, and it won't be, this is peeing into a hurricane. It may make someone feel better for a moment, but after that, they're still covered in pee.
  7. SonicAnatidae

    Some guy throwing Ranked Games

    Ahskance, What you are dealing with is people being tired of apathy from Support and/or uneven application of the rules. I sent in a ticket, provided information, and asked for very basic information so I could troubleshoot the problem. What I got back from the clown replying (Thanks Jon!) was copy/pasted policy statements that related to things I didn't ask for and no useful answers. After 3 replies asking for the information, I was finally given the information that literally proved what I said was happening, and the ticket was closed as resolved, because that's how support works? That's how support blows off a ticket and when this happens enough, people stop giving 2 [edited]. I know this because I have worked on, built and managed helpdesks for 3+ decades. It's literally my career. Now, you're asking players to send in a ticket and if enough are sent, things will happen. That may be the case with you singling out a ticket and addressing it, but it doesn't change the fact that WG support is wholly apathetic and/or simply incompetent. I can't really judge the latter, because support doesn't actually work tickets, so it's a guess. This is the environment you're working in, Ahskance, so good [edited]luck.
  8. SonicAnatidae

    I got a question for yall

    I'm career IT and currently, I maintain the infrastructure and helpdesk at a software development company. While I do not work in marketing, I do work with the data and the team(s), so I have some perspective. First, there are much better and simpler ways to fake survey data. Having a survey exit out if a 1of 10 answer is given as the first question is stupid for dozens of obvious reasons. Why not have the survey continue, but flag the data for the dumpster? Exiting the survey immediately just makes it obvious to the user for literally no practical reason. Second, feedback is usually tiered. There are simple 1 question surveys and 10 min surveys and narrative surveys and metric surveys. Most often are the 1-question surveys asking for a simple numeric rating, because users generally don't like to fill out 10-min surveys every month or 3. This data is also simpler to correlate, albeit is more generic so less useful other than being a general barometer of recent changes. You can work the longer surveys in, a couple of times a year, but if you want/need frequent feedback, a majority of that will be an easily measurable metric, like "How likely are you to recommend WoWs to your mom?" scale of 1 to 10, rather than narrative feedback like, "What do you like about WoWs", which is much harder to correlate into actionable data and takes a lot more time. It also often generates more total data points, but of a lesser frequency, because everyone has a different POV and often expresses it differently. This type of data is harder to draw conclusions from. Lastly, frequent lengthy surveys can irritate users and most people won't bother, when compared to a simple 1 to 10, 1-click answer requirement. I'm not saying WG is perfect. The player support is uneven and sometimes just outright sucks, which personally just pisses me off all out of proportion. Just recently, they blew off a ticket of mine and I know this because I've worked on, built and managed helpdesks for the past 3 decades. I know when someone blows off a ticket. However, what OP is accusing WG of could be done in much better/simpler ways, than what was mentioned. It's much more likely explained by what I stated in this post, a bugged survey or something similar. I'm confident of this for 2 reasons. I work in a very similar industry with similar needs and I shave with Occam's Razor. YMMV
  9. SonicAnatidae

    YouTube Membership! Get In-Game Items!

    Great, WG has lost it's mind. Congrats?
  10. SonicAnatidae

    Win or Lose, CVs never Win

    They aren't here to argue a point. They are here to argue, period. Recently, I had some idiot in a CL that died 3 mins into the game, and for the rest of the game, spammed CV hate/instructions, because I didn't drop everything to run fighters over to a CL that YOLOed. It just went on and on. I muted them eventually. After that game, I checked their stats. They had a total of 11 games in CVs. Eleven. Games. The other problem is the amazing players. Most, not all, but most of them can't see what it's like for a majority of the players playing, since they have a vast sum of knowledge and it's used without conscious thought. 90%+ of the playerbase doesn't see what these unicums see when they look at the board. Things are obvious to experts, but still unknown to people with 100 CV games out of 1000 total games played. Incomparison, the non-unicums also usually lack the skills to land full torp salvos, commonly getting 1-3 hits out of 4-6 torps, are inconsistent with bombers and rockets to them are scouting and loliboat hunting only. I have the same issue in my field, IRL. I'm an expert IRL and sometimes I fail to realize the other side of the conversation doesn't have the same background/knowledgebase that I have and that the point of discussion wasn't obvious to them, like it is for me. To be perfectly clear, I think CVs *CAN* be OP, or wreck a team, but it's only the really good or really bad CV players. Most of the time, CV players are within the mean, which means they contribute to a battle, about like they would with a CL, but are not changing the flow of things very much. This is in Randoms. Even I won't argue CVs in Small Team Games. They're just stupid, imo.
  11. SonicAnatidae

    Things as a CV Captain that annoys me

    Admirable, sincerely. That makes like 4 of you now.. ;)
  12. SonicAnatidae

    Interceptors and you.

    This moment has been an absolute blast in my Minotaur. I drive out, get plane spotted, then take 90% of my health in damage. A true joy to experience. ;) Luckily, it's not been too common, but more frequent after the change, for me, at least. With Dead Eye around, Incoming Fire Alert is now required for no-armor CLs, imo. In the past, I would run with or without it, depending on my build, available points, etc, since I knew when shells were likely coming anyway a majority of the time. Priority Target was fine. Now, I just sometimes suddenly get blapped for a huge chunk of health if I don't have IFA. At least it's a cheap skill.
  13. SonicAnatidae

    Things as a CV Captain that annoys me

    This word also works when surface ships act like a [edited] to the CV in chat, then demanding they bring you fighters or cover a stupid 1-man push into 3 enemies. CV play is different and just like surface ships, there is nuance to learn, what targets to hit and when, etc. The CV has the ability to change the flow of the game, but only when played by someone that's reasonably good or noticeably bad with them. What commonly happens is rocket surgeons with 11 games insist CVs are broken, or players with 2k CV games insist they are broken. Here's the magic. Most players that we see in CVs aren't that good or bad. They are somewhere in the middle. They are playing them for a change, or for a lark, or just to play something different than their surface ship mains or because they got focused and now it's time for payback. They have either not learned the nuances, or just take time to get back into the swing of CV play, making the 4 games they play, poor. So, the real answer is: Yes, CVs can disproportionately affect a match, BUT only if the player is very good or very bad. Most of the time, they have limited impact, because playing CVs well is a bit more than planes go brrrrrr. Note: This is about Random matches. I dont play CVs much in ranked, because in a Small Team Matches (ie.7v7), CVs are hella broken, if played well. I play CLs for ranked mostly, but after enough games of garbage CVs on my team getting my team rekt, I break out a Lexington or Kaga or Midway, for a few games.
  14. SonicAnatidae

    Dry Dock: Kaga

    I think the Kaga is an odd bird. It presents like a damage CV to me, but personally I play it like a Support CV. Having vast numbers of planes is meant to somewhat mitigate their fragility, but plane mgmt is still something you have to manage. Losing lots of planes early, on the Kaga, is usually a bad game for me. I'm not saying its another Enterprise, but if used correctly, it can do a great job of being a support CV early and damage dealer mid/late game. The rockets suck, so nuking DDs "for a 20k left-click" is impossible, but the team is supposed to be shooting lit targets, when in range, so that helps. You can also, obviously make multiple passes. The good news is they are throw away, so sending them at high-AA targets, and only getting 1 shot off before losing the squadron doesn't hurt as much as it does with something like the Midway. My goal with these "throw-away" attacks is to start fires and break AA mounts, making them easier targets for bombs/torps later or just taking down their DCP, so my team can get a perma-fire going. The torps are great. I often use them on DDs, when I'm flying over towards bigger targets, since there are enough fast-moving torps in the water to make dodging harder and/or I can make them straight-line for easier shots by my team. They drop in a good pattern, if aimed in, and travel reasonably fast. They are great for probing smoke that DDs are hiding in and being able to throw 12 torps through smoke at a variety of angles often pushes them out of the smoke or just kills them. They are also generally easier to land a few torps each time you drop, as long as you line up well, THEN HOLD THAT LINE. The bombers are great at starting fires. You can try using them on DDs, but in my experience, they aren't accurate enough to hit a DD that's twisting and turning to avoid the bombs. If they are loliboat straight-lining then you can hit them if you drop the bombs late in the aiming cycle, closer to water level. They do however hit Cruisers/BBs easily and with a 50% fire chance, they are quite useful. They require a bit more setup in the shot, since they can't pirouette like USN bombers. I play the Kaga as a Support CV. I spot, I drop fighters, and I do dmg mid/late game. Being able to rapidly cycle full squadrons often and early is a big boost in stalling the red team, early and when the board is clearer of enemy ships and consumables are low/out in mid/late game, they can do serious damage. Like everything, YMMV. Edit: I profess no amazing skill, but I am a CV main, so take my opinions as you will.
  15. SonicAnatidae

    CV Issues in 0.9.9

    Not accurate. Just last night, I watched planes that already dropped getting shredded by AA/Flak. So, now, it's unintended bugs AND misinformation? What I love about the patch cycle is ripping out the code that's buggy appears to not be an option. Instead, it'll likely be the option of a longer cycle of manual patches that most of the playerbase won't see/get/use, and 1 and counting attempts to address the issue, on the LIVE server, because players don't mind at all. They just pay (premium time, that will not be refunded) for the joy of playing on buggy code. Had the test environment been the clone of the LIVE server it should have been, these problems would have been evident in the first testing game of CV play, but no.. that didn't happen, evidently. Mistakes happen, but this "push the problems to the playerbase to deal with" approach frankly, sucks. Revert the code, fix it, then roll it out another time. Deal with the knock-on issues this will cause with subsequent patches and learn that maybe, testing is a bit more important than previously thought. Is this WG or the White House?