Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

  • Clan


Community Reputation

44 Neutral

About GabeTheDespot

  • Rank
    Warrant Officer
  • Insignia

Recent Profile Visitors

521 profile views
  1. How To Get Out Of A Slump?

    I can’t help you much, I consider a WR gutter a WR lower than my current average, so I am in a bit unreliable. Although my suggestion is to take a break from the game, or play a ship you like and win in consistently (that being Roon for me).
  2. 1) No, I said your OPINION (not nothing, nor less valid) wasn’t any more valid, not your skill, in other words, my opinion at 300 battles and acknowledges problems with the class is as valid as one with 4K but hates on the class for being OP. If anything, I should be the one complaining as you just said your opinion meant nothing with lots of sarcasm after I said ours were equal, implying yours is superior to mine. 2) From 90 degree angles, check Patiently makes sure I am in the center, check drops in response to my movement, check Yes he could have done better, but the drop was well placed, and I was capable of dodging it. 3) The main problem with CVs isn’t their strength, it is their learning curve that more closely resembles a sheer steel wall 100 ft high.
  3. Well played to you then, this is a very effective tactic, so keep doing it!
  4. I have seen squads obliterated by an Ibuki, and DM has plenty of AA without DAAF, if a DM doesn’t obliterate all the squadrons, like @KiyoSenkan said, that is a learn to play issue. I have been able to drop a DM with an Enterprise only late game while he was running Hydroacoustic Search over DAAF. Unless the DM was detonated or had low health, that is a different problem.
  5. I mean, you are the one hating on an entire class of ship for its playstyle; just because you played it a lot doesn’t give you opinion any more validity. Also, yes, CVs need changes, does that mean that it justifies killing and dancing on the grave of the class, no. CVs are powerful, but are only a hard counter to stupidity, the BBs have workable AA, and with speed boost, DDs go faster than air launched torps, making dodging them no feat at all (I have dodged cross drops in a Nurnberg while I was still a noob, w/out DAAF). CAs over tier 5 can be immune to most CV attacks, and can help nearby ships. The only ships that can take massive damage without being able to prevent it are BBs, and they do the same to DDs, CAs, and CLs, so it isn’t the only hard counter.
  6. I remember when bearing the patch, I was certain they were going to say that the AP pen was buffed (“we improved the penetration on the HE shells”), I had to watch that again. Those CAs still have 100mm of pen at max non-range modded range, so at range, it is the accuracy throwing the shells away from flatter extrémités into the belt or deck, where they don’t pen. If they undo the HE buff, I want the Krupp value increased to 24,000 so I can have a full meter of pen at max range, no less. At least I think the Krupp mechanic works that way.
  7. Only if there is a perfect balance of skill will the primary determining factor be RNG, as can be noticed (to a greater extent) when a CV is more experienced, which is more frequent in matches with CVs, as there are 1 per side usually. Although massive DD skill disparity is rather infrequent, there are a lot more matches with DDs to roll that chance! DDs have a slightly lower skill floor than CA/CLs, but a much higher ceiling to boot, and they can have much more effect on a match than them much more easily.
  8. No, I do not support WoWs communism, but I have wondered what the credits spent vs credits earned was for the entire player base. Does the community make a profit overall or does it make a deficit overall? What do you guys think?
  9. 9) Without an experienced CV to counter them, experienced DDs can quickly gain map control and keep the entire enemy team spotted and (those that can) send torps from multiple sides onto any feasible resistance from the other team.
  10. WG: Please fix New Mexico Armor

    Negative sir, it’s Yamato, Alabama, Amagi, then New Mexico, with 55%, 50%, 49%, and 44%?, respectively, I think. EDIT: New Mexico has 42% TDR, my bad.
  11. Roon - i need help.

    I have used almost exclusively a double rudder+reload build on my Roon, 5.5 second rudder shift is perfectly acceptable, and allows you to doge Zao shells from 12km. Otherwise, go range+stealth, as this adds more versatility, but be warned, this thing has slower reload, and after Hipper, that might not be a very fun experience. This also means that your armor profile and torpedoes (the threat more than the actual damage) become less effective, which in turn reduces the ship’s potential damage output and performance. Double rudder+reload is better for randoms as you can turn insanely quick in comparison to other builds, and the combo of maneuverability and damage output means you can minimize the damage taken, while maximizing damage output. If you are unsure (I cannot see your play style, and cannot tell you which would be better), try both of them, and judge which one you like more.
  12. Epic Buff to Low Tier CVs?

    I wouldn’t be so sure. But I think you are right.
  13. Epic Buff to Low Tier CVs?

    Then the BBs with long range AA can spec for it, AA SPEC KONGO FOR THE WIN!
  14. OWSF was a mechanic that is even more stupidly unrealistic than strafe, so nobody bring up strafe’s rather apparent lack of realism. Also, OWSF was about positioning effectively, and sometimes even not so effectively and led to stagnant, campy play for most ships that could do it. As ships that could stealth fire could remain undetected the entire game, so although comparable if removed, one requires a lot more skill to execute overall to any great effect, and has counter play. A BB cannot counter play OWSF the same way an attack aircraft squadron could doge a strafe, heck, several cruisers had detection ranges larger than the OWSF detectability of the DDs that could do it, which is even more broken than multi-compartment overpenetrations deleting DDs. Another note, manual attacks are analogous to aiming in surface ships, the planes aren’t the ammo but the main battery guns of a CV. Removing alt attacks is like making all aiming aimbot-like, it removes all the variety that makes CVs so interesting. Besides, removing OWSF only limited when ships could engage, not to what extent they can, removing alt attacks would prevent CVs from having much difference from aimbotters, and removing strafe would disallow CVs from protecting their planes and squadrons, assuming no alt attack replacement.
  15. No, it isn’t, the lack of people learning to use these attacks is what is causing it to decline, strafing, fair enough, so long it is replaced with a different alt attack, manual drops are easy to do, they just need practice, like aiming.