• Content count

    476
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    4140

Community Reputation

127 Valued poster

About Kerrec

  • Rank
    Warrant Officer
  • Birthday
  • Portal profile Kerrec

Recent Profile Visitors

253 profile views
  1. I started WoWS by going down the US BB line. I was particularly aggressive, pushing into caps early and often. I'd get great games, or potato early on, for a mediocre average, a non-existent survival rate and a bad win rate. Then I tried Ranked play with the only reasonable ship/captain I had available at the time: a cruiser. It took me some time to adapt to that, but after ranked was over, I stuck to cruisers for a good while. And that's when things started to improve. My mistakes were punished quick and early, which made for a much better learning environment than BB's. And I effectively took the fight to my nemesis while in BB's... DD's. Now, even when I play BB's, I protect myself as I would playing a cruiser, and I shoot at DD's with the same fervor I did when playing Cruisers. All in all, it seems to be working well enough that I pulled up my win rate from sub 50% to around 52%.
  2. And what exactly are you doing by saying "A player won't"?
  3. I don't think he's saying HE is being detonated every few games. I think he's saying it's not rare to SEE a detonation every few games.
  4. You are speaking FOR other people, when you say "A player won't"... I dropped Elite:Dangerous for ONE single reason. Oops, there goes your blanket statement, since I am "a player" too.
  5. I see you are now speaking for my friends too. You think I never asked them why they don't play anymore? Detonation is the FIRST thing they bring up. Being fodder for higher tiers (+2/-2 MM) is the second. Having to grind to get ships, only to find out your new ship is crap because it's stock and facing even higher tiers, is #3. Stop talking for other people, plz.
  6. It doesn't happen overnight. Let me put it this way. Out of all the friends I tried to get to play this game, exactly ZERO continue to play, for various reasons, among them: Detonations.
  7. What are you saying? If a company puts out a product, then it is "logically" perfect? Are you not aware that many companies go under because of poor choices? There are SOOOOOO many game companies that no longer exist because their game was poorly executed and no one wanted to keep playing. I'd argue that there are many more failures than successes. I'd hardly dare make the "logical" jump that because the product exists, it is perfect or well executed. Now, I'm not saying that WoWS is one of those companies. The game still has "a" playerbase. However, WoWS is not hugely popular, nor would it ever be a candidate for esports or anything similar that would thrust the game into the spotlight. And one of the many reasons for this, is too much needless randomness.
  8. No no. Take out RNG from the DETONATION mechanic.
  9. What are you implying? That it isn't that way right now? That some people ignore the citadels to shoot magazines with the intent to cause detonations? Are you saying that there are some unicum players out there who are unicum because they aim to detonate, instead of landing citadel hits? Your argument is self defeating. The game is ALREADY like this. The Unicums are unicums because they have great aim, great map awareness and they go for the largest consistent damage, always. IE: Citadels.
  10. But that wasn't the point of his post. In reply to your "always fight with the advantage because that's how it's done in real life" argument, he stated that in a game like WoWS, no one plans on detonations to win a match. It is not part of a game plan, ever. Detonations, as an idea, is fine. But making it 99% RNG, is not. The flags and the modules can all stay. Just make detonations something that can be reliably accomplished with skill, and reliably countered with skill. Remove the RNG.
  11. WoWS is not real life. It's a game.
  12. Did you plagiarize that from a website that sells game hacks? Because it sounds a lot like the kind of reasoning behind people that use hacks in games.
  13. Don't know. Last night I played against one while in my York. I went around an island to kill a DD (and did so) but a KVG was at out at my max range. I turned to angle and kite, but he hit me with 3 salvos, with the following results: Salvo 1: Knocked out gun, lots of AA and set a fire. I let it burn. Salvo 2: Knocked out engine, set 2nd fire. I used DCP because without an engine, I had no hope of reaching cover. Salvo 3: Knocked out engine, set 2 new fires. I survived, but that one encounter left me with no HP buffer to contest any other ships. I had to play super careful, taking me out of the fight... Not that it mattered, I was so weak at that point a full health DD opened up with guns and killed me before I could retaliate. Every one is up in arms about how much fire does to other BB's, but I'm really not liking the British BB's for the module damage they do when they're not actually shooting at other BB's. I'm fine with letting a fire burn, so I can use my DCP once in cover. But I have NO CHOICE but to use my DCP when my engine and steering gets knocked out, knowing full well the next salvo will be just as painful, no matter how angled I am.
  14. The answer to this is the player base. Another niche and very complex game is Eve Online. They keep trying to make tutorials and newbie guides built into the game, but it is clear that to have player retention, it is much better if the newbie is guided into a player corporation (clan in WoWS), and especially good if said corporation/clan is focused on newbie training. Create incentives for players to form clans with training regimens focused on teaching brand new players. Then create incentives for new players to join these types of clans and advertise it right in the game client.
  15. It is bad game design. What is and is not bad game design is a matter of opinion, and it is my opinion that it is bad game design. Your 99% is a figment of your imagination, pulled out of your stern. The forums have repeatedly shown that the people who frequent the forums are mostly in favor of keeping detonations, but that's like asking a church choir if they're religious. The target of the poll is causing a heavy bias for the poll. I would be more interested in knowing how many people ran into the MM +2/-2 or the Detonation mechanic, and uninstalled versus the people that have come to accept or are pro-detonation. I'd wager the fictional 99% you threw around would be in favor of my point of view. You're being obtuse. People are not arguing to have these things implemented in the game. They are arguing that using history as precedence for detonations is asinine because WG have ignored LOTS AND LOTS of historical things in favor of gameplay. Yet for this one thing, HISTORY is paramount by the forum community. It's selective use of HISTORY as a blanket "stop bothering me with this" excuse.