Jump to content

h9k_a

Members
  • Content Сount

    790
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    29602
  • Clan

    [WOLF5]

Community Reputation

199 Valued poster

1 Follower

About h9k_a

  • Rank
    Warrant Officer
  • Insignia

Recent Profile Visitors

1,213 profile views
  1. h9k_a

    achievement awards

    I think you mean reward, not award for each achievement. Regardless, if you mouse over the signals you can see what achievement earns what.
  2. Because the 2nd daily chain mission REQUIRES wins to count.
  3. Because if you put a bunch of 43% wr players together, they’re not going to stay at 43%. They will over time normalize to 50%. The same thing happens to a group of 65% players. Since you can only win/lose and rarely draw, over time everyone will end up close to 50%. since those players have not changed in their ability to play the game, the artificial normalization to 50% WILL NOT CHANGE the quality of players that are in matches..
  4. And just what metric are you using to define skill? If you use win rate, then over time all you're doing is normalizing most everyone to a 50% WR. If you use base XP, then when WG changes the way xp is calculated, it will skew that result - remember right now you are minimally rewarded for doing things like spotting and tanking potential damage for the team - the majority of your XP is based on % damage done. So those players that do "team things" or playing the objectives are not rewarded with the XP of the damage farmer.
  5. h9k_a

    Update 0.9.1 - Bug Reports

    Starts tomorrow when the patch drops across all servers
  6. h9k_a

    Update 0.9.1 - Feedback

    Nope it's 9 regular containers AND 1 super for a total of 10
  7. Well this may explain why "spreadsheet" doesn't always reflect what the players think. WG will always have the answers they seek when they don't ask questions.
  8. h9k_a

    Steel boats changed to Coal boats

    The OP wanted compensation for people that bought steel ships that are now going to be coal ships in maybe 6 months after they're removed from the steel list. Their compensation IS the fact they got to play it already. They don't deserve any additional compensation. They got earlier access allowing them to earn additional XP/Credits, complete mission directives, etc. IF a refund was given then all of that would have to be removed from the players account as well. Now if the player has never played a single game in those ships then maybe they could claim a refund of steel, but then they're not going to be able to purchase the ships with coal until October/Nov (at the earliest) when they get reintroduced to the armory as coal ships.
  9. h9k_a

    Steel boats changed to Coal boats

    No because they spent the steel to gain earlier access to the ships. To be fair, if WG offered a return, then the players would have to return all the credits, xp, wins, any missions/challenges/rewards that they obtained by playing the ships.
  10. the range extender is exactly that. It extends your range. it does not increase penetration or damage. Since shells loose penetration as they fly further (physics you know), you may see more bounces at the same angles/armored target as the range opens.
  11. accuracy reduction doesn't discourage camping. How many games have you seen a German BB sitting behind everything else sniping? Or a French BB that is static instead of using their speed to get on the flanks to get shots at broadside targets because they can create crossfires with their speed. You see alot of "Bunker cannons" because WG has a desire to sell high tier BBs. They can create a T8+ BB and charge $50+ for the base ship. They have to create a product that gives the delusion that the player will do better in a premium ship. Most of those campers don't understand that those videos that they see from the CC's showing 200k+ damage games are because they can actually play the game. You have a bunch of bad players that buy those ships because they can't do well in tech tree ships. They also think that if they advance to a T-X, they will play better because the ship more accurate, does more damage, etc. They don't understand that their poor positioning is what causes them do do bad. It's not the HE spammer/dd/CV that is the problem, it's because of decisions they made 2 minutes ago that put them in that spot. Take a look at WG's shelving of the RU T-X BB they were working on. They finally came to the conclusion that a hyper accurate BB is extremely dangerous in a good players hands, but in a bad players hand, it can't be balanced. Look at the Ohio, Georgia, Thunderer or Yashima. Those are all recent ships that have less guns than their tier counterparts that claim to do better damage/etc because they're more slightly more accurate/have bigger guns. All that is marketing targeted at the campers because WG is selling the illusion that you can now camp in those battleships and increase your damage/credits/xp. WG doesn't know how to address the camping mentality because it isn't prevalent on the RU server. The devs play on the RU server. They don't see/understand the different metas on the other servers. That's why you see ships that are initially tailor made for the RU meta that are then tweaked to fit into the other servers via "spreadsheets". What you are seeing is marketing/sales driving the game play meta instead of making sure the game play meta supports the ships that are released. That's why you see ships that were considered extremely OP in the past (Graf Zep, Blys, Gremmy, Kut, etc) that have been "power creeped"; they haven't it's just that the new ships have shifted the game play in a new direction. WG doesn't understand or doesn't want to understand that by constantly shifting the meta, the game will never be balanced. Naval warfare at it's core has not changed in centuries. Yes the weapons have gotten better, but at the end of the day it's about putting ordinance on target. We've gone from smooth bore cannons to rail guns; range and accuracy improvements, but it's still about positioning, creating crossfires, focus firing and how to maneuver to create mismatches. Camping exists because there is no mechanism that consistently punishes the behavior. Every time there is a perceived threat to that type of game play, WG rolls out nerfs to appease those players that buy those ships. Those player have no reason to get good. Instead WG punishes those players that actually want to damage those campers. Seriously, how many times have we read/heard some BB complaining I got burned down because the HE spammer shot at me for 5 minutes and finally sank me....in 5 minutes....that's 1/4 of the possible game time. Oh no, I used my damage control and got hit by this stealth torpedo that flooded me and sank me....please nerf floods. I got cit'ed, please lower my cit. Bad positioning and lack of situational awareness SHOULD be punished. Instead we give everybody nerf guns so they don't hurt those micro-whales that can't play and allow those sloths to dictate why what used to be a historical naval simulator (whose mechanisms were changed to allow for arcade type game play) become an arcade game with very little to do with naval tactics/real ships other than skins.
  12. Those players that are too afraid to push forward will still find a reason to camp.... Oh no, if I go forward, I'll get AP pens....oh no, that dd that's 20km away might hit me with torps, etc. Removing HE spammers will not solve the issue of players that don't know how to play their ships are under fire. They will just find another reason not to push forward and sit in the back and snipe. Those players genuinely believe that the 1 overpen that they got from firing an entire broadside fully justifies sitting in the back because 1) they did damage and 2) they didn't take any damage so of course they helped the team. If you really want to discourage mid and late game campers than restore the flood chance so that a single torp hit can kill you. That's the only thing that may force those bait ball players to actually move instead of being a large sitting target behind an island if they finally understand that sitting still for long periods of time should be a death sentence.
  13. h9k_a

    Best Seal Clubber?

    Exactly. WG has done as much as they realistically can by making all of the reward/bonus mission chains/campaigns/directives Tier 5+. Those low tier premium ships are an inexpensive way for new players to get introduced to how to use a premium ship as well as a cheap throwaway that WG can give out as a reward/bonus/promo. If those players still want to go down to T-1 and play thousands of games to get their stats green, all that shows is that they haven't mastered any of the skills necessary to have a positive impact in a game. That player that has 15k games with 5k+ games at T1 with an overall 50% WR is no better than the 43% WR player that only plays T-8 Premiums (and I'd argue worse since they're going to come in with this huge attitude because they think they're good).
  14. h9k_a

    Developer Bulletin 0.9.1

    With the new upgrades and reworked upgrades, there needs to either be an auto-dismount or an amnesty period so we can change our builds. The AA guns mod 1 rework will definitely change what ships I have the module currently mounted on. Currently if you turn off your AA guns while sector reinforcement is active it does not disable sector reinforcement. I would suggest that that be changed so that if players want to cancel reinforcement, we can disable AA guns and removes the reinforcement if it's active and starts the cool down clock.
×