Jump to content

SyndicatedINC

Members
  • Content count

    1,426
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    7735
  • Clan

    [PLPT]

Community Reputation

445 Excellent

About SyndicatedINC

  • Rank
    Lieutenant Junior Grade
  • Birthday 07/03/1978
  • Profile on the website SyndicatedINC

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

2 Followers

Recent Profile Visitors

793 profile views
  1. This, we don't need the obnoxious citadel/huge health loss hit sound, especially not when it overrides audible queues for things like inbound torps (because we apparently don't need to know about those things we could be dodging, but do need to know that we just got hard after the fact). We need basic audible queues of statuses that we can acknowledge to silence (ie if DC is on cooldown, don't need to keep being told we are on fire).
  2. I would like to share not a match which was rage inducing for me, but rather one which was rage inducing for someone else (due to MM mechanics). Way back when divisions were not restricted to one tier difference, we all remember seeing that tier 1 ship dragged into a tier 10 match. Well this got my friends and I thinking. What happens if you try to bring a low tier CV to a high tier match? MM for CV at the time stated they had to be evenly matched but also limited maximum tier the CV could see. So if a division was mismatched, what happens we thought, so we tried it. The answer is, after 5 minutes of no similar division entering queue, it grabs the first available low tier CV and forced it into a high tier match. So my Langley/Yamato division dragged some poor soul in a Hosho into a tier 10 match.... The Hosho driver was very confused and venting in all-chat about how they had no idea how they got into the match. Everyone else on both teams was laughing as they explained. I felt bad when we found out that not only was this poor Hosho driver outmatched by tier, but that this was their first ever game playing a CV..... ouch
  3. That " Uh-oh" moment

    Its also a realist perspective. One can earn greater rewards by ending the match sooner and starting a new one than by dragging out the definite loss.
  4. uhm Skpstr, I think you are confusing Shards and Trap.
  5. Save a star, ride a cowboy

    Yup. My point is that this is unnecessary. WG could have a system which was more skill dependent AND still make them money like the current system. As far as I can tell the only reason that we have what we have is that no one much cared about what was banged out over a weekend, but some decision makers must be sadists, and decided it must stay as such.
  6. Wasn't in the match, but from your description, you lose because your team went A and C and the enemy team went B and C. That is "the trap". A split cap attack can work on some maps but really not that map when the enemy goes mid plus one other. Generally speaking a lot depends on the spawn, but the Northwest spawn is usually stronger at C, and the SouthEast is usually stronger at A. However the Northwest spawn gets good island positioning to thwart the SouthEast strength at A, whereas the SouthEast does not get a similar chance to thwart C. Also from an attacking perspective late game, B is easier to attack from the A cap than from the C cap. So if you go B and C, and lose B, you are up a creek often.
  7. Save a star, ride a cowboy

    Agreed, WG does not however get to implement a system designed just as you say to give average players the ability to rank out, and then turn around present it as a "test of skill", "competitive mode", or "rank 1 is highly skilled" as they have done, and expect us NOT to call them out on it for the such a claim is. Also as an aside, there is still plenty of reason to play ranked under such a system, just as many play now but don't grind to rank 1. The rewards at multiple levels are really nice. To be honest a 50-55% player is likely still to rank 11 or better, which is not too shabby in terms of flags and goodies.
  8. Detonations need to go!

    Murcc, this has been suggested multiple times before, however you have two things working against it. First and foremost is WG, they want detonations to be non-skill based, and tying them to dev strikes is moving them away from complete RNG and into more skill based realm, so it won't happen. Second while some pro-det folks on these forums would be happy with a compromise that keeps "mah historical", many would still be opposed as they enjoy dets as they are lower skilled players and thus benefit more often from free damage and wins that dets give them, then they lose by dets caused to them. These folks will never agree with you on any change that takes away the random unearned charity they are given.
  9. Save a star, ride a cowboy

    Agreed, although I think a ranked mode running as it does except 1v1 would be legitimately a serious competitive format of sorts, yes WG clearly doesn't want that. Given the system we have and looking to fix it with the fewest changes, I would say simply do away with stars. Basically run the season and at the end assign ranks based on performance such as win rate, avg XP placement in match, etc. to everyone with a minimum of say 100 battles (players can do more if they think they can increase averages, but must play a minimum count to be included). Individual minimums can even be by rank, so say a player must have 100 or 200 battles to be assigned rank 1-5, but only 10 to be assigned rank 20, etc. Give the top 1/23 rank 1, the bottom 1/23 rank 23, etc etc. WG still gets a grind fest that promotes lots of flag/premium time/ship sales, but players get a reasonable expectation of game count required. The ever infuriating yo-yo effect is gone, and MM matters less when individual placement matters as much as wins. Hell the system could still invisibly track a player's "progression" and MM teams as now by leagues, just without the stars. As a bonus then you can offer the super league after the season, and have an actual population sufficiently sized to play it.
  10. Save a star, ride a cowboy

    ...and that there Kombat_WOMBAT is the problem with calling ranked 'ranked' or advertising it as a test of skill. You are an excellent player, but when it is more a test of tolerance than of skill it has no business being portrayed as some sort of skill metric. Yes higher skill means ranking out in fewer games, but even then there is a severe stress threshold keeping many skilled players away, and any system that by nature is driving away skilled folks is not a competitive format. Yes ranking out should be for a small proportion of the population, but given there is 23 ranks, if it really was some skill based metric, one would expect to see 1/23 of the population (ie greater than 4%) at rank 1. with 1/23 at rank 2 and 1/23 at rank 3, etc etc. This is not the distribution, and it is entirely due to the stress of the mode. In a word, WG version of "ranked" is a joke of a competitive mode that they should be ashamed of. It is a blatant grind fest designed to pull maximum money out of players in exchange for shiny toys, under the guise of competition, when it is anything but.
  11. Based upon the range that they chose (seriously, the range is about 40% more than any other cruiser with her number of guns/caliber/range) and it being longer than the Zao, as well as the tone of the Devs in explaining why they felt it was necessary to counter the Kutz OPness (despite it not being OP by W/R, yet the Belfast who is far more OP by W/R got a decent smoke firing range), I think that a few of the Devs play high tier BBs and got burned to the water line once too often by Kutz, so personally wanted to nerf it hard. The funny part is that the Kutz is my most played ship, and if anything I found the smoke nerf to be a useful tool. I rarely smoke up that close to anything as it exposes me to being rushed in smoke. The biggest fear is that someone is going to stealth approach my smoke and be right on me when it clears (torps were never an issue thanks to hydro). Now you get free notification when someone is sneaking up on you, and its time to move. Its almost like getting free radar!
  12. Its boosts their numbers. They will allow about anything that does that.
  13. It is against WG rules. I would say submit it, but not just via support, but via PM to the Devs on these forums. Remember the rigging the damage contest back when, and WG responded not via support but via these forums complaints.
  14. Striving to be better at something is always special and never pointless, even if it is not a real world skill. No one who is better today at something than they were yesterday has wasted their time.
  15. Ranked MM imbalances

    Turbo allow me to explain. What you see as a problem, they see as "working as intended". This is a FTP. They need people to willingly buy premium items to make a profit. Multiple research projects on this demonstrate that those who play more pay more and more often. The key is to get someone hooked. Ranked is one of those tools. Offer great and exclusive rewards but make achieving them intensely painful and slow. People start to look for any edge to get ahead. A premium ship that has beat them a few too many times in match suddenly doesn't seem too expensive anymore. Heck while we are at it if spamming so many games, may as well have premium time, and camo, and flags... For every 3 or 4 $5-$10 players they lose, they make a $100 sale. If the entire ranked season was like the first few days at Rank 5, where it takes hours to get a match going, THEN the developers would do something to make it more enjoyable. However all the grumbling in the world doesn't change the fact that one can queue up for the other rank brackets and get in a match as fast or faster than one can for randoms most hours. So long as thousands of people keep playing hundreds of ranked battles every season, and WG keeps making tons of money from it, nothing will change.
×