Jump to content

CrazyHorse_Denver

Members
  • Content Сount

    1,035
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    13277

Community Reputation

291 Excellent

5 Followers

About CrazyHorse_Denver

Contact Methods

  • Yahoo
    johnwburns333@yahoo.com

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Denver, Colorado, USA
  • Interests
    books, history, gardening, poker, hiking and camping in the mountains

Recent Profile Visitors

1,126 profile views
  1. CrazyHorse_Denver

    Your very first Premium was?

    Back in early 2016 a month or so after I first started playing the game I bought both the Murmansk and the Ishizuchi at the same time. I had not yet started to play DDs and needed a CA with good torps to fulfill torpedo based missions and the Murmansk fit the bill. That she also had decent guns was just icing on the cake. She's been power crept into being a port queen now but back in the day she more than held her own. On my list of most often played ships in random the Murmansk is still in the #3 spot with 344 games even though I haven't played more than a hand full of games in her in the past year. As for the Itchy Zucchini at the time I needed a IJN BB Captain trainer and she was the only one available. Useful at the time I got rid of her some time ago as my fleet out grew her.
  2. CrazyHorse_Denver

    What stats should be used to judge the success/failure...

    A real test to be sure but of what? If they've dumbed down CV play so that any average player can earn enough credits to make playing tier 10 at least a break even affair I don't know of how "balanced" the play is going to be against the other classes of ships. Being an average player myself having ground out all the way to the Midway I can say that even with a Premium account that not being profitable is what keeps her in port even more so than the AA at T10. It just seems as though it should be difficult and making CVs easy for anyone to play is going to throw the game into places we know not where.
  3. CrazyHorse_Denver

    Your favourite destroyer line?

    I've had a lot of fun with the German DDs. They have a good mix of torps and guns. IJN and USN DDs are usable once you get used to their individual style differences. The only line I didn't like were the Russians...good guns but crap for torps. Of course you probably shouldn't listen to advice from someone who doesn't really like DD play. I play them because to put together the best fleet possible an Admiral needs to know the capabilities of all the ships.
  4. CrazyHorse_Denver

    Yet another poll on CV's

    Old system ...No New system...Yes...Unlimited planes...you got to be kidding me...It's bad enough that DDs have unlimited torps.
  5. … of the CV rework? And how long should we wait for things to shake themselves out before passing judgement. The number of games that have CVs? That will jump up quickly but will it last. Even with the overall AA nerf the upper tiers will still be more costly so that finding a CV in a low tier game will be common and not so common at upper tiers just as it is now. The number of players that run CVs? Again it'll bring in a certain number of new CV players at first, but is it really going to be that many. What about those current CV players that have already decided the rework is just not going to work for them and stop playing them, some sooner and some later on. So if after say 6 months the CV player is static or even just slightly increased could the rework be considered a failure Overall game player population? I see nothing in the rework that appeases the "Sky Cancer" crowd; if anything it's only going to make them more livid. Unlimited planes mean that those last 5 minutes of a game your beaten up ship will be facing full strength squadrons instead of those 1 or 2 plane squadrons you see in the end games now. Would a sudden drop(or even a drop over 6 months)be attributed to the exodus of the "Sky Cancer" crowd or passed off as being caused by something else. Thoughts? Comments? Yes Virgina...There is another CV rework thread.
  6. CrazyHorse_Denver

    CV rework...I don't think so...

    Automated consumables... no dual control of ship and planes. You got to be kidding me. Why have a captain at all; just make all CVs robots. I'll give it a try but I'm not optimistic. In other threads on the topic I see people saying that they will be selling their CVs back to WG for FXP. Do we know for a fact that FXP is what will be used to buy them back and what about the premium ships that we paid cash for. I have a ship load of credits(close to 200 million) but could always use more free XP especially with the Alaska coming out. I wonder if it'd be worth it to buy back some of those CVs I've left behind to cash in on the FXP to get ships that I can actually play and not be just a spectator.
  7. CrazyHorse_Denver

    who even approved?

    But if we are casting about for a solution to a supposed problem than the "why" is indeed relevant. Don't you think?
  8. CrazyHorse_Denver

    who even approved?

    Not moving the goal posts simply pointing out that there may be other factors that keep the numbers low. Such as... the way CVs are rewarded economically make them a waste of time for most players that need credits or XP. Where are the numbers that show it's because of the RTS mode of game play. That's the assumption being made that I won't swallow hook line and sinker unless you can show me otherwise.
  9. CrazyHorse_Denver

    who even approved?

    As to why upper tier CVs don't get played as much there's two basic reasons. The AA at the upper tiers is a killer...quite literally. How CVs are rewarded economically is another reason. Spotting and providing air cover for your allies don't pay the bills as well as causing damage which ties in with the first reason. Perhaps a change in how CVs are rewarded economically would have an effect on how often they get played.
  10. CrazyHorse_Denver

    who even approved?

    It is the controversy surrounding the rework that CV be gone crowd is pinning their hopes on. Hoping for it to be a big spectacular failure would be the easiest way to get rid of them.
  11. CrazyHorse_Denver

    who even approved?

    It would be nice if you state something is a fact if you could provide numbers to back it up. Even if it is a "majority" how do you know for a "fact" that it's because of the RTS mode of play and not something else that keeps them from playing them. I know that DDs were the last class of ships I started playing. Not because I had anything against them but because I was busy learning how to play the other classes. It would have been wrong to have included me into any group not playing DDs because they had some problem with them.
  12. CrazyHorse_Denver

    who even approved?

    Well I never avoided playing CVs so I may have a different perspective. From reading the forum posts for a few years now I do know that there are players that simply want CVs gone from the game. To back that up take a CV into almost any game and watch as your karma points disappear as you get reported for a variety of things none of which have to do with driving a CV as well as putting up with the salt in chat because you being there with a CV means that there is also a red CV out there.
  13. CrazyHorse_Denver

    who even approved?

    From what I can see the only real enthusiasm for the CV rework comes from those who want CVs completely removed from the game. If this rework fails they may indeed have their dreams realized.
  14. CrazyHorse_Denver

    Grats on best Youtube add for games WG!

    It's even an honest ad in that many of us spend a great deal of time exploring the depths of the sea.
  15. CrazyHorse_Denver

    Camo preferences...

    I totally agree. The Shadow Lurker camos look amazing on all the ships. It's a shame there's no way to stock up on them.
×