Jump to content

SyndicatedINC

Supertester
  • Content Сount

    2,088
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    11598
  • Clan

    [NGAGE]

Community Reputation

1,329 Superb

2 Followers

About SyndicatedINC

  • Rank
    Lieutenant Commander
  • Birthday 07/03/1978
  • Insignia

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://www.pelagicpirates.org

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Everyone's a monster to someone

Recent Profile Visitors

1,800 profile views
  1. SyndicatedINC

    Why Is This Community So Toxic?

    less ≠ none Yes there is toxicity, my post was a comparison one to similar online games where players are being directly pitted against each other and relying on unchosen teammates for their rewards earnings. In said comparison I have noticed a much higher level of toxicity in both total volume and percentage of players who participate in it, as well as the percentage of matches one experiences it, in most other online direct competition games such as FPS and MOBA then in WoWs. Additionally I have noticed a far more active culture of moderation action here in WoWs then in other games. So sure there are games I have been in that make this place look like some sort of cesspool of behavior. However overall compared to the gaming community as a whole, WoWs is on the side of the "it ain't too bad here" line.
  2. SyndicatedINC

    How was this a draw?

    1v4 win is a solo warrior, so I'd say double that (1v8) for a draw should count for one as well, right?
  3. So you are shaming someone for posting a bug. Quite rude and uncalled for!
  4. SyndicatedINC

    Highest Victory Score You've Gotten? (Single Game)

    I saw a 1200+ score last week.
  5. SyndicatedINC

    Any serious discussions on Real Manual AA

    We are in agreement here. However I still hold the question, what would be so wrong with letting players aim their flak if they wanted to but leave it automatic exactly as it functions now if they don't want to? Against the players who are already getting flaked to death, automatic would still be most effective, or at least as effective as manual, as you can't do much more than is already happening when the planes are flying right through the flak. However for the good players who can dodge, now you are offering a skill based balancing the same way surface ship weapons (torps and shells) do. I mean if a player is bad and can't manually control, thus leaving it automatic, then literally nothing is different than it is right this very second (which is a situation WG considers okay), so whats wrong with that? Again I just don't see the argument holding up. It is very flawed logically.
  6. I know folks with 10k+ battles who have never visited these forums. If they were to decide to make a post about a bug that the rest of the forums have known about for a long time, I wouldn't presume that they would know about it. Quite the opposite, I'd assume they are completely new to all of this.
  7. SyndicatedINC

    Any serious discussions on Real Manual AA

    While the rest of the argument I have my doubts about, but not enough to speak for certain that something theoretical will work or not. The trickle down argument that WG presented just doesn't hold water. If balance based upon the skill of the player using something is such an issue versus reduced effective when automatic, then why on gods earth was flak made (and kept still despite numerous updates) so strong, yet completely dodgeable with skill. The result is bad players get absolutely wrecked and good players aren't touched by it. If player skill inconsistency was such a concern, WG would have addressed flak, as this issue with flak was brought up even before it went live.
  8. SyndicatedINC

    Why Is This Community So Toxic?

    Every game that involves people interacting is going to have its share of 'incidents' as humans tend to have a wide and diverse set of personalities many of whom do not mesh well together. The anonymity and non-face to face interpretation of the internet only increases this friction. That stated, of the direct competition games that I have played, this game has one of the less toxic communities that I have seen. If folks find WoWs extremely toxic, perhaps a quick trip to many a FOS or MOBA game would give them some perspective on things. Overall many here care about the game and their fellow players. Questions are answered often, quickly, and with good detail and sources/links. New players are encouraged to improve and stick around by most other people.
  9. Since when is someone's forum status "not a noob" on their very first post?
  10. Are you seriously shaming someone for reporting a bug?
  11. SyndicatedINC

    Question regarding the Flooding How It Works video

    As per WG Saturation has no effect on either ram damage allocation or on flooding chance. I would suspect location, but again according to WG that is not supposed to be a thing. Likewise for current health pool as the video states it is total HP pool of target. As for speed I have heard that it affects flood chance on ram, but this latest video doesn't say that, yet we see examples such as this, hence my question. It is rare, (hence why I am asking if it may be a bug) I have witnessed it directly in battle maybe 2 or 3 times, and seen approximately 5 videos or streams such as this example one where it happened. Always figured it was some secret mechanic we didn't know about, but this latest video puts certainty to it not being possible, so I wonder was what I saw bugs? Yeah, I ran a quick math on it and confirmed that both ships suffered ram damage >10% their HP (which they did), but it was slow ramming, so perhaps it is a per tick thing Indeed as stated above, perhaps it is an increment thing?
  12. SyndicatedINC

    My Quest is Over! 1000 containers...

    I echo this question as well. Given how long it took me to open all when I had 30+ I would assume you could go make dinner in the time it took to open all 1k!
  13. So the latest How It Works video is in regards to flooding. This particular section states that flooding occurs during a ram when a target ship loses 10% or more of its total HP to a ram. This seems to imply that this is 100% chance of flood (ie "ramming causes flooding if it inflicts..." when a Ram does that much damage to a target. However We see many examples of rams doing more than 10% of the targets HP pool and no flooding occur. Are these instances bugs which we should be reporting to the support team or are we misunderstanding the video and it is merely a 'chance to cause flooding' when 10% is reached? A quick example: Yamato loses ~20% of total HP to a ram and does not flood, plus causes >20% total target HP ram damage and does not cause a flood.
  14. Random battles in a nutshell....
  15. SyndicatedINC

    Is the current radar delay making the DD skill gap worse?

    But how will the masses have easy mode if they don't have the game telling them where things are, and when they are detected?!?
×