Jump to content

Baskerville77

Members
  • Content Сount

    239
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    2613
  • Clan

    [STURM]

Community Reputation

114 Valued poster

About Baskerville77

  • Rank
    Master Chief Petty Officer
  • Insignia

Recent Profile Visitors

725 profile views
  1. Yes, if this doesn't make it to the live game, it's totally for the one reason that supports your bias, and not because this is a large buff to some of the most hated rapid fire ships like the Worcester and Minotaur, as well as the IJN gun DDs. And of course it wouldn't be because WG finds any other reason they don't like the impact on the game. See what I mean by bias?
  2. I'm downvoting you because I'm so tired of your "everything is always battleship player's fault attitude." In regards to the changes, on one hand, I like that DDs and CLs will be able to more reliably deal damage to BBs, without relying on RNG fires. One the other, I think this might encourage more HE spam, now that superstuctures can't stop providing damage, and the idea that adding torpedo bulges make a ship less survivable is really bad design.
  3. Baskerville77

    Punched in the face by luck

    So, today I log in and check the directives in the Royal Navy event. Two in particular catch my eye. The "get 300 ribbons" and "get 150 ribbons in a British DD" ones look like I could hammer them out pretty quickly, considering how much I like my Lightning. So, I hop in to battle, and after the first game concludes, I am left with this: 128+1+5+2+5+1+1+6=149 Really? (At least I got the "set five fires in a British DD" mission done.) Eh, no problem, I'll just take her out for another spin. I even still have the first win bonus. As long as I get at least 151 ribbons in the next game, I'll get them both. Almost 20 minutes later: So, not only did I lose one of the best games I've played in a long time, but 116+5+4+5+5+4+6+1+4=150. 150, EXACTLY!!!! That fifth torp couldn't have cause flooding? I couldn't have knocked out one more gun on the Shima or Gearing I killed? I couldn't have set just one more fire? AHHHH! I'm gonna take a break before I chew my fingers off in frustration.
  4. Baskerville77

    Understanding Clans ?

    That really depends on the clan. Some are super competitive, others like the "Wolf" clans really only exist for the members to get the benefits, but otherwise don't really care unless you quit playing, and then they boot you so someone who is playing can get in.
  5. Baskerville77

    This Game Very Badly Needs an Actual MM system

    Heck, to be even more specific, what if it's a ship like the Cossack? One that is more hurt or helped by the matchmaker than usual? Suppose there is a player that is great at bullying other ships when top tier, giving them above average win rates in tier 8 games, but cannot deal with radar, giving them below average win rates in tier 9 and 10 games? I don't think the game even keeps track of that at the moment.
  6. Baskerville77

    This Game Very Badly Needs an Actual MM system

    The problem is at the moment, if you balance everything but the CVs, you get teams where 11 ships are roughly equivalent on both sides, and one team has a 30% winrate carrier, and the other has a 60% winrate carrier. Blowout ensues, everyone gets salty. And balancing by skill becomes even harder once you factor in that different people are better in some ships. How would you balance me, for example, with a ~55% overall WR, but ~50% in cruisers, and ~59% in DDs?
  7. Baskerville77

    Question about Mahan and Terrible torpedoes

    So it was some control option I was overlooking. Thanks, that's very helpful.
  8. So, I recently unlocked the Mahan, (and seem to have gotten a cursed ship, I cannot win in it) and am going to buy the Le Terrible because that speed will make me giggle every time, and I noticed the two ships are similar in torpedo tube layout. They both have a center-line launcher that can fire to both sides and a launcher on both sides that can only fire on that side. I don't recall playing any other ships with this layout, but my question applies just as much to any that do exist. Is there a way to make the side mounted launcher fire before the center-line one? I had a game in the Mahan where I was expecting a ship to pop up on my port side, but there was a small channel on my starboard side that I wanted to send one launcher down just in case. I ended up firing the center mount first into that channel, so I halved the torps available on my port side by accident. Only way I can think of is to look all the way to starboard, then swing your camera around to port (or the other way around) and fire the side launcher before the center one gets into position. Of course, that's wildly impractical in most situations. I realize this is an edge case that only happens on a few ships rarely, but it still bugs me. Is there some control option I'm overlooking?
  9. Baskerville77

    Premium Ship Review #111: Jean Bart

    Sometimes at work I want to grab people and yell "you are complaining about how other people can't express their opinions outside of so-called safe spaces to someone who might get fired for disagreeing! Do you have an ounce of self-awareness?"
  10. Baskerville77

    Premium Ship Review #111: Jean Bart

    Baltimore: Your "objectively extremely strong" ship is seventh out of eleven tier eight cruisers, tied for LAST in K/D with the Prinz Eugen. Those are objective facts that don't line up with your opinion. Duke of York: The reason LWM called the DoY garbage is because it is probably the worst purchase in WoWs right now. It is a $40 plus worse version of something you can get for free. That is her main complaint and why she thinks it fails utterly as a premium. Kidd: So, what? Now are you complaining that LWM doesn't come to people's houses and force them to read the whole review? If you glance over a wall of text to get to the one word summary of a very complex ship and use that to decide to spend money on it, that's your problem. KGV: And here you go again, demanding that LWM spend time to make seven twenty hour plus reviews as well as have her opinion match what you think it should be. For all your quotes and walls of text, you don't read what you respond to, do you. Shut the hell up. First, LMW doesn't make those chibi characters, @Chobittsu does if I'm not mistaken. Second, I struggle to see how dispersion models are unimportant when they show exactly how accurate a ship is. You complain one moment about how her pictures are not accurate enough and then complain that the 100% accurate ones are not important. As for how much time she spends on a ship, Stop twisting words to suit your argument. LWM said 27.4 hours was the time it took outside of play testing games to get the review up, not total time. She said she spent 7.2 hours in games alone, and if you have a way that four twenty minute games takes seven plus hours, please share it with us. So, to sum up what you are asking, you want LWM to spend 34.6 on nine different cruisers in the American tree split for a total of 311.4 hours, or almost two straight weeks reviewing ships that don't impact her goal of helping players make informed purchases, then you want her to somehow condense all that information down into pretty pictures that perfectly match public opinion that doesn't even exist yet. The thought that because she doesn't spend that much time on every review means all her reviews are lazy rush jobs is profoundly insulting in a way name-calling could never match. If you somehow don't see that, you have the social intelligence of a self-centered first grader. Show me final proof of exactly how many games she has in the JB. You are the one calling her a liar, burden of proof is on you. Again, show me proof that she doesn't put in enough effort despite her saying she spent 7.2 hours play testing it. You fixate on the bite sized tech tree reviews, but overlook that those are low priority compared to the ships that cost money. Not to mention that the tech tree reviews don't have much data in them, so your argument is fundamentally flawed. Considering the fact that different levels of thoroughness in reviews take different amounts of time seems to be beyond you, it captures your essence well. (Man, it feels good to give someone both barrels after seven straight days of customer service.)
  11. Baskerville77

    Premium Ship Review #111: Jean Bart

    Exactly. Also, to everyone thinking LWM overreacted to the things DoubleIdiot said (love that his username preps you for the quality of his post), she only got really riled up after he said she didn't put in enough time for her opinions to be valid. I repeat, he told her that she didn't put in enough time or effort in the review where she admitted to making eight versions of a graph before she was happy with it, only for factors out of her control to render the entire review obsolete and needing to be redone. If she didn't get angry, I think that would be grounds for sainthood.
  12. Baskerville77

    Mass vs FDG: P2W!

    Then use the reload module for higher DPM. And your kinda overlooking several facts here. The Mass's secondaries are fragile but accurate. The FDG has more robust secondaries with increased penetration. The Mass can bring 6 guns forwards, but is super vulnerable to citadel hits from the side. The FDG has to angle to get more than four guns on target, but is pretty much immune to citadels from close range. They are somewhat different ships. Besides, the FDG is a clunker compared to the other tier nines. I would rather compare the Mass to the Bismarck, and that comes down to personal preference.
  13. Baskerville77

    Premium Ship Review #111: Jean Bart

    This "heads I win, tails you lose" double standard is why I would never want to be a reviewer. Your opinion matches the public's? You're just a sheep who obviously caves to the mob first chance you get. Your opinion is different from the public's? You're just an arrogant snob who thinks they know better than everyone else despite obviously being wrong. I don't come to LWM's reviews to get the general public's opinion. I come to her reviews to get all the in-depth information broken down with comparisons to similar ships as well as HER opinion. Then I form my own on if I want to get the ship. That youtuber bottom line thing is supposed to be a joke, not the word of the gods on their mountaintop. And that's why I view the youtuber reviews of tech tree lines as mildly informative entertainment. And even that is more effort than I personally would put in considering it doesnt impact LWM's goal of helping people make informed purchases. Tech tree ships are free unless you drop tons on FXP, and if you do that before you listen to people who got the thing, that's on you. Meanwhile, the ships she reviews in-depth can cost more than $60, the price of a new AAA game, and a good chunk of money for many people. Demanding the small tech tree review be as deep as the premium's shows a disregard for LWM's effort and time, and a misunderstanding of why she does this. Wanting them all to somehow match general opinion means you don't know what makes reviews valuble.
  14. Baskerville77

    How is this a loss?

    I had something similar happen once. My team collapsed (partly because I had horrible aim that game) and I was the last ship alive on my team in my GK. I launched some shells at a low health Alabama right before I died. In the moment after I died, but before the game ended, the Bama sank. It was hilarious. It recorded him as dead, but he got dreadnaught. And my results screen had him in full, as if he survived, but with the icon for sinking him.
  15. Baskerville77

    MY OPINION 2..

    There is no cruiser in the Sim's matchmaking spread that has a gun range less than 10KM. I cannot comprehend the thought process that you must have used to say you were out of their gun range. Even in the second picture, 12KM is not outside even the shortest ranged cruiser you could have met in battle. And as I said, the secondarys must have fired before you went unspotted. Or did you think they just vanish when you go hidden? Plus, secondary guns are more than capable of sinking and incapacitating ships, so we can add that to the pile of things you are clueless about. In any case, I've had enough of you. I've been very patient in trying to explain away your misconceptions, but it is clear you live in a fantasy. Despite people with three times as much experience telling you you're wrong, despite the wiki staffed by WG picked and approved players contradicting you, despite the GAME ITSELF proving you wrong, you insist you are right and reality itself is wrong. You are either a troll, or someone with a very poor grasp of English and an ego so undeservingly large you cannot admit you don't understand what you read. In any case, until you realize you are wrong, you will continue to fail at this game. Don't bother responding with any dubious claims about being a programmer or misinterpreted game facts, I won't respond. I'm just going to enjoy watching you flounder.
×