Jump to content

HTSMetal

Members
  • Content Сount

    311
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    7313
  • Clan

    [WOLF2]

Community Reputation

259 Excellent

About HTSMetal

  • Rank
    Master Chief Petty Officer
  • Insignia

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Satan's Armpit, KY

Recent Profile Visitors

1,303 profile views
  1. Well, since you insisted we look... No....no you don't.
  2. HTSMetal

    Minotaur in the era of deadeye

    There's a reason why the queue has less cruiser players in it consistently now -- the IFHE changes, additions of CV AP rockets, proliferation of 18 inch battleship guns and overmatch mechanics, captain skill improvements to battleship dispersion and a decided lack of any actual intelligent or meta-functional skills for cruisers on the new captain skills tree has lead to cruisers being not very much worth playing at the moment. They were arguably the most difficult class to play and have a meaningful impact in prior to all these changes, and now (and I'm saying this as a cruiser main) there's not a great reason to play them anymore because they no longer really excel at anything any other class can do just as well.
  3. This thread...you mean, guy does research, finds Wargaming patent and asks legitimate question based on data he finds? This is why people avoid the forums -- toxic users like yourself that have literally nothing beneficial to add to a thread and give crap to people talking about the very subject of the thread!
  4. Amazing and thoughtful response and that explains a LOT! Thank you!
  5. I see that you're involved in supertesting. Are you confirming from a development perspective that this matchmaking patent is somewhat or entirely functionally irrelevant to how the current matchmaker in WOWS actually works? If so, I appreciate the insight! I highlighted a portion of your quote to see if you could clarify that for me -- I don't specifically see anywhere in the patent where controlling player win rate is expressly stated as a goal of the matchmaking patent. It reads as if it's designed to control battle composition through ship tiers and the number of battles a player has played in a given ship, the success rate they've had in it, and also a check on battle difficulty depending on whether or not the ship is a premium. In reading this it almost sounds like, at times at least, the patented matchmaker can or does use a player's "success" rate in a specific ship to create and balance teams...so if that is the case, then there is more to the matchmaker than the simple "ship type and tier" that seems to be the common assumption if it has been implemented in some way in WOWS. Either way I find this fascinating.
  6. Because I was curious, I decided to do some Google-Fu about the Wargaming matchmaker and how it functions, and I discovered this: Dynamic battle session matchmaking in a multiplayer game -- Patent No. US8425330B1 -- https://patents.google.com/patent/US8425330B1/en This is a very interesting read, and if Wargaming (the patent holder) has implemented even a tenth of the complexity of the matchmaker described in the patent, it's FAR more complex than what is assumed here (just ship type & tier).
  7. I'm genuinely curious -- how do you know that for certain? Has that ever actually been explicitly stated by Wargaming?
  8. 41 seconds to load for me -- Intel i7-9700, 1 TB SSD, GTX 1660Ti, 16GB DDR4. My living room media center desktop with a 10 year old AMD Athlon A8-5500, 1 TB mechanical drive and GTX 760 loads in 1:23. I have 1Gbps fiber internet and I assume that it helps the connection to the gerbil-powered WG servers immensely.
  9. HTSMetal

    Moskva

    Echoing the sentiment of other posters here, cruisers are suffering tremendously right now. The IFHE changes, additions of CV AP rockets, proliferation of 18 inch battleship guns and overmatch mechanics, captain skill improvements to battleship dispersion and a decided lack of any actual intelligent or meta-functional skills for cruisers on the new captain skills tree has lead to cruisers being not very much worth playing at the moment. DDs, however, have been an absolute BLAST recently which is a nice change. So many Dead-Eye BBs literally just sitting there, immobile, waiting to get smacked!
  10. HTSMetal

    Buffalo

    Yeah, that's why I'm currently in the Top 100 on NA with the Buffalo. Just trying to help from someone who actually knows how to play the thing well.
  11. HTSMetal

    Buffalo

    If you don't believe so, you aren't playing it correctly.
  12. HTSMetal

    Buffalo

    It's an excellent cruiser; problem is, you can't play it the way you play the ships that come before and after it and expect the best outcome. It excels in open water; if you play it bow-in, island humping you're often going to be unable to bring those rear two turrets to bear, and that additional firepower is what makes the Buffalo amazing! It also works in open water because the citadel is harder to hit than the Baltimore and Des Moines when kiting -- take a look at the difference between them in the armor viewer when you get a chance. Don't be fooled by the fact that it has radar -- it's not a boat that does well pushing caps early on. You do not want to be the focus of enemy attention in the early game. Try it out with range mod as an open water kiting cruiser, and make sure you switch to AP anytime the situation calls for it as 12 guns with American AP can be disgustingly powerful!
  13. HTSMetal

    Did anyone test this patch?

    The fact of the matter is that NO ONE at Wargaming cares about this game like we do. There is absolutely zero possibility that anyone at Wargaming plays it as much as we do; if they did, there's no question that they would know better than to create skill trees like these. This truth has been made evident in a laundry list of decisions they've made over years now. There's little we can do about any of this beyond closing our wallets.
  14. HTSMetal

    Smaland NERF in 10.0

    Smaland has never had 15 km torps AFAIK...
×