• Content count

    530
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    3988

Community Reputation

117 Valued poster

1 Follower

About Zero_Kelvin

  • Rank
    Warrant Officer
  • Birthday June 29
  • Portal profile Zero_Kelvin

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    The Pacific Northwest
  • Interests
    Ships, racing, music, wrestling, and several more arbitrary things
  • Portal profile Zero_Kelvin

Recent Profile Visitors

891 profile views
  1. You're telling me. That whole post is basically word salad to me, completely unable to make anything out of it, other than some gibberish about only agreeing comments welcome, which is a laughable request, and not one that anybody will adhere to.
  2. Maybe what's thruthfully going on behind the scenes is NOTHING? You're missing a crucial bit of evidence: WHY? Why would Wargaming, out of thousands upon thousands of ranked players, single out you of all people, and specifically mess with you? I very much doubt you can give me one good answer, but without one, your argument is based on nothing, and it's clear that this is just a string of bad luck you're going through. Then again, a lot of people who go through losing streaks in random battles cry rigging too. Please don't tell me you're one of those people too.
  3. As a battleship player, I can tell you that battleships are in no way struggling, it's everything else around them that's having to come up to their level, which is completely unfair. Also, a few things: 1) Of course BBs are damage pinatas, because they're the biggest, toughest, slowest, easiest, and most dangerous thing out there, and their only real counter is HE spam, which even in itself isn't doing enough to balance things out. And NO. Do not nerf fire damage in any way. If you did that, what would be the point of playing any other kind of ship? Because then, every other ship besides BBs are not viable, which is already almost the case. anything that nerfs the one thing that is a guaranteed hamper on battleships will render the other 3 ship types completely meaningless. 2) What are you talking about with BBs being "Stuck with low damage roles"? If I'm driving a BB, and if I'm not seeing 80k damage per game MINIMUM, I consider it out of the ordinary, because it is nearly impossible to not deal high damage in a battleship unless you're completely mentally incapacitated. 3) Did you consider that people kite and sail away from battleships because of they got closer they'd be one-shotted with ease? So this leads me to another question: How can you possibly make AP shells from battleships more dangerous when they can one-shot every other type of ship in the game with little effort? At the moment, the WoWs meta is a lot like middle school. There's a group of savages that rule the roost and get all the fun for themselves while everyone else is picked on and abused. However, I don't think home-schooling is gonna be a solution to this issue. But I do agree with you on one thing: the game really does need to be balanced more, so why don't we start by giving people a reason to fear destroyers again? Or how about actually giving meaningful buffs to cruisers? How bout more diversity for CVs?
  4. Unless you know you're gonna hang onto the ship, don't buy the premium camo. It has great bonuses, but if you're just gonna scrap the ship, what's the point?
  5. You're not wrong, but it still doesn't change much. If you're a smart captain, you can manage without smoke, much like how British cruiser pilots can either go with radar or smoke.
  6. So the reload goes down form 5 seconds to 8 seconds. And...? How does this change the fundamental play style of the ship? It doesn't.
  7. Okay.....as a fellow Bismarck player, is this really a problem? I don't think so.
  8. Oh my god, you literally just insinuated something after you said you didn't insinuate anything! I didn't realize there were so many people around here with short term memory loss. Also, no, most non-CV players don't hate CVs. Most non-CV players don't care about CVs, so stop speaking for anyone other than yourself.
  9. So you don't see them as a big issue even though you're calling them a big issue in the same sentence? Okay then. Also, change the "Many" to "some lower tier players" and you're spot on.
  10. I see a problem here. You claim that you're not saying carriers are ruining the game, yet in your paragraph, you say that an arcade game, which you've already established means this game, is being ruined by a mechanic, which it doesn't take much figure out that mechanic is CVs. So how are you not saying that carriers are ruining the game when you literally just said it a few sentences ago? Aside from that, if you need a better argument, then CVs are not ruining the game, If anything, the game is being ruined for CVs. CVs have more and more odds placed against them every single update, and they're rapidly approaching destroyers as the most nerfed class of ship in the game, and that just isn't fair, especially to the people that like CV gameplay. I myself don't really care for CV gameplay, but I know many people do enjoy it, and are increasingly disappointed with how easily they're done away with. As legoboy stated a moment ago, low tier carriers have it especially rough now that they can't even manual drop, which drastically reduces their effectiveness, on top of CVs at that tier having their hangers depleted very easily, as well as less defenses from their teammates because they don't have Defensive Fire. As for 2 carrier games, they seem to be the exception rather than the rule, unless RNG just like double carriers one night or something, but I do see the concern. I'm not a fan of dual carrier games myself, and would much rather it be limited at all times to 1 CV per team per game across the board. But again, I don't get this stigma where CVs are these supposed all-powerful, unstoppable, invincible killing machines, because in reality, they're underpowered, easily countered and killed by just about everything, and are the most difficult type of ship to play in the game, not just because of the drastically different play style, but because of the AA power creep.
  11. Arcade games are still analogous to reality to some extent, so why should we ignore such a major aspect of naval reality?
  12. Well you're a real burst of sunshine, laddie. Care to actually explain your viewpoint rather than spew obscenities like an angry teenager?
  13. So explain why CVs should be taken out of a game based primarily on WW2 vessels when they are widely considered to be said War's focal points, major catalysts, key players, MVPs, and the ships that singlehandedly changed the course of naval history in the 20th Century. Give me one good reason that's NOT based entirely on subjective viewpoints and emotions and maybe I'll take your argument seriously.
  14. You seem to be misconstruing what I'm saying. I never said you couldn't learn something by doing it as well, but you can also learn from a large group of people, not "a couple of guys", who have experience in that same thing, especially if they've been doing it far longer than you have when you've started out. So no, just doing something is not the only way to learn about something, that's why there's several different types of learning techniques that are recognized by science.
  15. The funny thing is I do. That's exactly what I base my findings off of, people in my clans that I play with regularly, and I see using these ships regularly, and they have a lot of good things to say about them. I really doubt that they'd lie about liking a ship, and then proceed to use said ship constantly.