Jump to content

SyndicatedINC

Supertester
  • Content Сount

    1,961
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    10864
  • Clan

    [OPG]

Community Reputation

1,130 Superb

2 Followers

About SyndicatedINC

  • Rank
    Lieutenant
  • 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

1,535 profile views
  1. SyndicatedINC

    FWIW, You are Wrong About the CV Rework

    That is true if talking about overall balance, which neither Pulicat nor I were, nor did you argue against. I honestly think that you are confusing multiple conversations with another. The initial point being discussed was not overall balance issues, but the specific imbalance in a skilled player going it alone to force plays when teams bunch up and fail to control proper positions. The position stated that the rework will generate more stagnant gameplay than the current live version due to the excessive difference in the ability to go it alone mid and late game when CVs are present. Now with the rework regardless of skill all players will be forced to stick together, and if the massed herd just goes to the wrong area that has no chance of victory, oh well game over man game over. It is comments such as these which cause people not to take your analysis so seriously. It was already determined back during the open beta and PTS round 1 that this method you describe (the 1:30) is not the most efficient means of attack. Rather to send planes back early when damage is taken and chance of a drop will be less than the full spread. Additionally it has already been figured out that the best means of stacking DoT is to use the TB for the reliable minimal damage, until getting a flood (which MUST be DCPed) then immediately sending them back to the CV with whatever unspent ordinance they have still and switching to fire starters, and lighting several fires on the ship, then once fire saturated immediately send them back to the CV again with unspent ordinance, and launching TB and going back to trying to score consistent minimal hits, and as the next DCP will be up again, a flood to trigger it and start over. This is all with these brand new ships. None of us is a super-unicum in this CV rework mechanics gameplay yet. This is the basic average gameplay one should expect of the average player with a few thousand battles int he future. True unicum will be even more frightening. But yes this is the "normal" benchmark to expect. You were the one who asked what the difference is between the CV rework CV attack and a Hindy now. The difference is the hindy can be killed, means you can STOP the constant damage from the hindy. No one worth anything gives a fig for a K/D ratio in this game. Additionally in the current live system, as you point out one can deplane the CV. So the difference is we are going form current live where one can stop surface or air threats eventually, to a rework where ONLY surface threats stop. THAT is the answer to your stated question. A hindy with 1 HP is not as dangerous as it is dead the next reload the Monty has. A CV with unlimited planes keeps striking and striking long after the hindy was sunk and gone. The current system the CV loses planes and it hurts over time. The rework the CV doing multiple strikes and fast returns effectively does not run out of planes an entire match (go ahead and test it, if you send the planes back at brown HP you can keep constant attacks almost every 30 seconds, and NEVER have a single second delay on launching). You are advocating for a system where a CV suffers no meaningful risk nor loss, to replace a system where they do have skin in the game. That is the issue of a 6 minute kill. On live that kill is doable but cost the CV dearly, especially mid to late game. On the rework that kill cost them NOTHING, and immediately after the monty dies they can start hitting the next ship just as heavily. Again you completely pick a different discussion and argue that having nothing to do with the topic at hand. Not saying you are straw-manning, but you are definitely confusing one discussion with another. So once again neither Pulicat nor I are talking about some potato sitting in back sniping at max range. Maybe someone else in this thread is, but we are not. Nor are we defending straight line sailing idiots who get what they deserve. We are discussing dynamic versus stagnant gameplay and how the balance of that is being heavily altered by the rework to favor stagnant (read boring) gameplay. Again this is not the argument that we made. The reduction of the high alpha is a good thing. DoT is a much better way to handle it. What is bad is that the only counter is the "teamwork" of sitting in a cluster. Which means when several idiots sit at max range sniping, like you have several times derided, it will be YOU who is the non-teamplay idiot when you die away from them, because you got closer to engage. See when teamplay involves shackling everyone together it means you play the lowest common denominator on the team, which is going to be the stagnant coward play. *sarcasm* Hurrah cant wait for that game play! *sarcasm*
  2. SyndicatedINC

    It's nice to be able to play JUST to play

    Indeed finished my coalmining duties yesterday, and the rest of the seasonal stuff sunday. After a sigh of relief its a great thing not to have a "job" to do, just to play for fun.
  3. SyndicatedINC

    Friend quitting over torpedo hacks

    Not giving cheaters a pass. They are scum and worthy of all the contempt folks heap on them. The point I was making was that AVR_Project is letting themself getting too worked up by these scum. It isn't healthy nor necessary. One can condemn them without letting them get to you, as unlike other games, the cheaters in this one are easily trolled. Case in point: These are exactly the easy to dodge things I am talking about. I have run so many co-op games grinding out legendary mods and blowing off snowflakes (I have a full port) and co-op is so damned boring because it is so damned easy. Predictable aimbot hack bots are too easy to dodge. While real folks may suck at aiming, their sucking means any shot could hit. Whereas with the bots, I know precisely at what range I can dodge 100% of the time. When you find an aimbot player in game just play like they are a bot and they will miss non-stop. Don't get mad, get even :-)
  4. SyndicatedINC

    FWIW, You are Wrong About the CV Rework

    You can not remove skill from the equation and call it balance. A potato CV could easily miss all torps on a bot, and by that rationale current CV mechanics alpha is perfectly fine. Pulicat was arguing that the current system punishes skilled players from going it alone to carry their team to victory, less than does the rework. He is correct, and skill is the factor being negated. You want to ignore it because it is what invalidates your entire position. You are aware that all of this number crunching is straight from play tests on the PTS where the lower flood chance is in play. The nerf is countered by the constant stream of attacks. It means when flooded you either suffer it or get immediately set on fire when you DCP. No amount of skill is stopping you from being flooded at some point. Unless they plan to make CV torps never flood ever, no matter what. But that hasn't been announced, so we can't posit our thoughts around such a setup. The monty can sink the hindy, and/or with proper DCP and repair party management plus juking and angling should be able to live at least 10 minutes. With the rework the monty can't live against the CV more than 6 minutes, and is lucky to make 5. Plus it can't even see the CV to shoot back. In other words to the discussion at hand about lone players flanking to carry their teams, a lone hindy isn't stopping a monty from doing that, but a CV will. Whereas currently neither will. Thus the rework has changed fundemental dynamics of the gameplay. Wait, are you only measuring survivability against Alpha damage/dev strikes? As sure a DD is more survivable alone in this rework against that then it is currently on live server. However some very high level DD players have demonstrated that it is more difficult to survive and take down a CV in a DD on PTS than on live. The constant attacks are small in damage, but add up and can't be stopped, and come far too quickly together. An AA specced gearing at half health, alone charging down a lone CV, gets attacked by 3 squads, 6 strikes, in 2 minutes, In the current system if the player had dodged/lived thru the initial alpha, they would not have seen another strike launched before the time in that video they died. Yet in the rework 2 more full squadrons get launched. That constant attacking is the difference that makes up for the alpha loss. Ships no longer have long safe dwell periods in which ot hit the CV. Which in turn has changed the dynamics of the game.
  5. SyndicatedINC

    FWIW, You are Wrong About the CV Rework

    Theory is great, but game needs to be balanced on practicality. A current CV against a good Monty, is not hoing to be able to drop 10 or 12 torps that will hit. They will eithe rhave to drop at such a long range, that they are easily dodged, or they will lose ~20%-30% of the planes before the torps hit the water. On top of that not all will be undodgeable. The more undodgeable you try to make the torps, the more planes you lose before dropping. A great drop is going to be ~4-5 torp hits for a Hak and 3-4 for a Midway. But doing so is going to cost you ~80% of your planes between the approach and return flight. This is sustainable only twice, and if done mid to late game (ie when this lone DD player was forced to go it alone because their team potatoed) then the plane reserves are even lower, and the number of such great hits is less. Additionally the drop has to be a full group up or else you lose 100% of your planes and launch even fewer torps. So you have to wait that much more time to get all squads landed armed and relaunched. Average turn around for a CV out of detection distance for full TB travel back land rearm launch group up and fly back is nearly 3 minutes. Comparably, on PTS v2 a cv the same distance away with the proper build and using consumables can drop nearly 3.5x times the number of torps in the water in the same time frame. Thes amount of undodgeable torps is over 2x higher in the same 4 minute window on the rework system then on the current system. So while the damage per torp is lower, the number of torps is higher, and the biggest part..... DoT is now constant, rather than punctuated several minutes apart. Fara demonstrated this perfectly on his stream. cycling 2 squads of TB on a human AA specced monty, until it DCP, then swapped to DB and rockets and lit several fires that burned full duration, before switching back to TB. He even said he was able to score more overall damage in less time on the rework then he could on live server. That the rework traded his huge but preventable alpha strikes, and replaced it with unstoppable DoT. Detah from a thousand papercuts. All of this is just on the PTS, before any truly super skilled players have developed at the new mechanics. If the top level RTS style CV players are already able to more readily abuse a lone ship on the rework WORSE than they do in the current RTS style. Again I ask where do you come up with the idea that a lone ship is going to be more survivable in the future when the rework goes live and players get even better at it? I mean the counters to it are not extremely different, so the counterplay skill is already there. The only skills that will improve are the CV player skills. So we are seeing a world of BEST CASE scenarios, on PTS, and it is frighteningly static gameplay creating as Pulicat mentioned.
  6. SyndicatedINC

    FWIW, You are Wrong About the CV Rework

    Clearly not, if you think a CV vs lone Monty today can do more damage in 3 or 4 minutes than the same CV on the PTS v2.
  7. SyndicatedINC

    FWIW, You are Wrong About the CV Rework

    Yes it most certainly does, and if you had played the PTS v1 and v2 with any skill you would know how wrong that is. Case in point, you seem to measure damage in alpha only. The CV planes TTT is far more important. Currently a CV trying to spread out damage to a monty to keep DoT is going to lose a LOT of planes, and score very low alpha, and maybe some DoT, but if the Monty successfully manages their DCP, the huge delay on rearming and TTT means it will be up before the CV gets a second chance. In the latest version of the rework, a CV can do an anemic initial alpha, trigger DoT, and keep consistent DoT attacks every 30 seconds effectively long enough that the Monty can not manage their DCP to any advantage, and will suffer more DoT and anemic hits worth of damage in the same window of time, than the current CVs can cause with their alpha. The best CV players in the game have pointed this out. What makes you feel you are more qualified than them to have a different assessment?
  8. SyndicatedINC

    FWIW, You are Wrong About the CV Rework

    Not swiftly enough that the monty can't turn a flank and the tide of the battle, if the player is good. Nor without serious permanent loss to the CV. The rework system allows a CV to hit a lone monty for more damage in a smaller window of time. This is why it is different, and stagnating.
  9. SyndicatedINC

    FWIW, You are Wrong About the CV Rework

    If you think this is about bow camping rear line sniping BBs then you completely fail to comprehend the point being made. Often when a team is failing hard, a good player simply has to pull up their big boy pants, channel their inner thanos, and say "Fine I'll do it myself". Which entails moving away from the group (who being terrible are in the wrong location needed to secure victory). This requires the ability to operate solo, which this rework is negating.
  10. Get them dead, often simply by withholding normal teamplay assistance will work, such as not popping defensive fire when the enemy CV goes for them, or not spotting for them while a DD hunts them, or not smoking for them, or simply sailing away from them to let them die alone. Dead players F key spam is disabled.
  11. SyndicatedINC

    Friend quitting over torpedo hacks

    You are far too upset by aim assist cheaters. Honestly once you recognize someone is using it, play with them. They are likely a scrub and their reliance upon the crutch makes it easy as all get out to juke them for days. Real humans are far more difficult, as the skilled players know how to predict and adjust for dodges, and unskilled players often aim for the "wrong" place when you present a false path, thus they hit the "right" spot where you intended to dodge. Whereas aimbot folks will forever be hitting the "wrong" spot.
  12. SyndicatedINC

    Friend quitting over torpedo hacks

    #1 If your friend never uses his guns because he is an IJN DD, then they are playing incorrectly. #2 BB rudder shift is fairly long. If everything played out as you stated, and the BB turned the moment the torps were fired, it means that they initiated their turn PRIOR to your friend launching torps. If someone was turning in reaction to torps you would visibly notice the turn approximately 10 to 20 seconds after launch. #3 You and your friend clearly do not understand how torpedo launch is handled nor understand the difference between server side or client side data. What you describe would require legit hacking, as in gaining covert illegal access to the WG servers. It is not a mod nor any sort of client side alteration, and nothing to do with the game engine. There are many cheats for this game unfortunately (such is the life in online games), but they are all client side cheats, using information readily available to the client via means of illicit mods. However they all require one thing to function, and that is information readily available to their modded client. If someone is not detected, and not within hydro range of an enemy, then none of the enemy clients are notified of their torpedo launch. No cheating mod has the ability to do so because the information is not available to them.
  13. SyndicatedINC

    Got a warning for using a mod

    That was the confusion, a lot of people who got warnings were vanilla client players. They were like "how do I use illegal mods if I use no mods?" The answer is a lot of graphical enhancement programs, including those that come with the GPU people use regularly are treated as illegal mods by WG software.
  14. SyndicatedINC

    Got a warning for using a mod

    That makes a lot of sense. I recall some time back, a bunch of reshade type warnings and bans went out, and that was a crux of the early confusion.
  15. SyndicatedINC

    Got a warning for using a mod

    Malware?
×