Jump to content

_WaveRider_

Members
  • Content Сount

    5,862
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

  • Clan

    [USCC2]

Community Reputation

1,750 Superb

About _WaveRider_

  • Rank
    Captain
  • Insignia

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
    UK

Recent Profile Visitors

6,606 profile views
  1. _WaveRider_

    How frakkin stupid is it...

    It is random because it is designed for only a few to win. They then come to the forums and tell everyone how blessed they are, and players start seeing the ships in game. This is when people start thinking 'but I'm good, why haven't I got the good luck some others have?' And each time they see a ship they will continue to think they too deserve luck. In the end when the luck does not come naturally (because of the low win rate), people will start to consider spending money in order to increase the luck they deserve as much as anyone else. And that is what WG intends! And for every person who says 'No I won't spend anything!', 3 have already spent theirs.
  2. It's a no for me as I am no where near the Montana, I have the Gearing Space Camo, and I am grinding to the Grozovoi (not Khab)…..but then I saw the Megatron camo I thought hmmmmm! But then I looked at the Space Camo and thought 'nope the Space Camo for GK is better!' The real issue for me is the stupid prices asked for what is 'a look'. The fact is, if I have already spent money on a look I like, I am not going to spend more money (especially the amount WG ask) on another look - however much I like it! The Autumn camo is God awful IMO, and I have so many Japanese Captains sitting in reserve the only possible Capt purchase would be the Pan Asian one (if you can actually get them as single Captain purchases!).
  3. I would respectfully request that, whatever the collab, along with the bigger bundles (that offer better value for money), WG consider a full spectrum of offers. An example would be smaller bundles more accessible to all. I believe the current AL would have been more profitable had access to smaller bundles/individual items been available. I did not spend on Captains because the bundles were either too expensive, or I would have been buying bundles that had items I already have. Please take this into consideration whatever the collab. Thank you.
  4. _WaveRider_

    So Puerti Rico Hate

    Good for you. It was a terrible event, but hating on a person just because they either had the time to invest in getting it, or they just decided to buy it because 'it's their money and they believe the purchase was worth it', shouldn't be something that attracts toxicity from those that are - well jealous most likely. I can't get half the stuff WG sell now as it is so expensive (bundles etc), or the bundles contain things I already have (so would be a waste). But I hope you enjoy the PR.
  5. _WaveRider_

    Atlanta Tropical Camo question

    I don't believe WG care. Atlanta was a great ship that could really pay dividends - or make you pay if you played her wrongly! But it had a specific niche and it was a good one! But then WG beat her like Negan beat Glenn to death with Lucille, releasing the AA change that was closely followed by the IFHE change. If I sound bitter it's because she is the only ship I ever won in a SC in 3+ years - just before the changes.
  6. Unfortunately I think all your likely to get here is the 'but its free stuff!' reply from many, and that is fair enough as it's true - the number of the normal stuff I earn from containers has risen, which is very nice. Where I find disappointment is how there has been nothing that will make me remember this event - something that when I play in future says 'Ah, that Waterworld camo was from the Rogue Wave event', 'Ah, the Implacable camo from the UK CV event', 'Ah the flags or even ships from the *** event'. The events had things that made them an...event! For me I forgot there was even an event on, because nothing has actually been 'eventful'. I could certainly pay for something tied to the release of the German CVs in order to remember the event, but how does paying for something you like, make it any different than any other time? I can't even say I am disappointed - I have just come to terms with situation being forgettable.
  7. _WaveRider_

    Going to commit heresy here

    I too believe the ability to play against radar is possible if your torp range is around the radar distance; for those DDs that are uptiered maybe not as easy. It is WGs inability to provide an MM that considers consumables that can lead to situations where a team can have multiple radars is where I think things go wrong. The worst I remember was 5 radar ships 2 CVs and spotter/fighter planes on BBs. In addition there was RPF and the DDs were predominately gun boat DDs (who's main target of destruction are.....DDs). The only issue there is the chance of hitting with a torpedo. Personally I have no fear of torps in my DD or BB, a little more in a light cruiser, the rest depends on the ship. This is because of the multiple methods of either identifying the 'hidden threat' or spotting the torps a while a way. I have both hit ships with multiple torps and the sail on (no not saturation), or I myself have been hit by a no holds barred zerg rush DD, and then killed it. For as many years as I can remember the hit rate is anything from around 6% - 12% for DDs (I usually just pick 10%); in fact it may well be the case that 2 BBs are still in the top 5 ships for torpedo hits (from when I last reviewed). Personally I don't think any one thing has/will kill the fun of DD play. I do believe it will be an accumulation of factors though. For a ship type that has always had the worst survival rate and the worst damage rate, there has been an unnatural fear of the DD. I can only put it down to those players who don't use their screen in front of them to full effect and neglect to take note of the mini-map and other signs of where the DDs are. I found the situation very similar to you, where the fun had started to be overtaken by the number of ships with spotters, fighters, Radars, Hydro, RPF, CV planes and gunboat DDs (pretty much designed to kill DDs efficiently). The CV itself can hurt a DD quite badly, so you do have to have one eye to scouting and contesting an objective, whilst also understanding the need to be able to drop back, but it is very much its ability to keep you spotted that also hurts. Again, this has always been the 'type of play' the DD has needed to deal wit - I just feel it is the saturation of some of these elements that has made the play tip from the risk taking/rewarding 'knife fight' or 'deadly assassin' feel, to a more scout and try to survive until later on to be effective for your team. The only issue there is that if your team has lost, then whoop, you haven't had that chance to engage and 'be involved' - this is a war game after all. If you are caught early - you are possibly dead, and if your team has won the advantage you can try and do something more. I appreciate your thoughts on the matter, thank you.
  8. _WaveRider_

    Going to commit heresy here

    But he states he plays at 15km away for the main - how many Tier VIII - X DDs have torps equal or greater than 15km? Then to flip the coin and taking the 10km torp range (and forgetting the longer 12km range radar as it is convenient in this example) - How many Tier VIII - X DDs have 10km range torps and how many do not. I think your 10km range is a fair assessment as it is that range where you dance inside/outside radar ranges. I believe having to play the risk presented in launching torps, with the risk of being inside radar range is fair. Again, I am for CVs in game, and I do not for a minute think all DD players are 'in the main' playing 15km away from the enemy - but I do also consider those DDs where their range are less than 10km and their gun range is around that distance too. We often talk about players having fun, and I do believe choosing to play the DD is a more risky choice at start of the game and then , if you survive, you become more influential as the game goes on. Well more influential if a CV isn't highlighting you - if it is your stealth has pretty much gone as planes can stay up just to spot late game. (However, if there are enough enemy to take advantage of the CV spotting and run the DD down, then I would suggest the team has probably lost the game anyway). I have tried to be neutral in my assessment (as I always do), but await the usual down votes - God bless my loyal followers!
  9. _WaveRider_

    Going to commit heresy here

    I'm sorry: You state 'for the most part' you play DDs at 15 k away from the enemy. Not exactly how I see playing DDs in order to be effective for my team (I don't remember seeing anything that WG pushed out about DD play starting with 'Sit 15km away from the enemy and spam torps out in the hope of causing area denial zones.' I do see information about scouting for the enemy team though). However, if this is indeed what you enjoy and find you have to do for the most part then good for you. Well you wouldn't would you, if you are sitting back 15km away from the nearest enemy in an AA bubble created by the ships you would usually be scouting for, then what exactly have you to run away from? They ruin your day - yet you find DDs still fun to play? No just confusing. Of course you don't run away if you play 'in the main' 15km away from the enemy sitting in an AA bubble. And you state that although this type of play, that you play in the main, ruins your day, you still find DDs fun to play. Honestly I genuinely think you are trying to sum up things from a positive/pro CV stance, yet even with best efforts - still can't get away from stating CV play for the most part ruins your day causing you to have to play 15km back in an AA bubble. I am not anti-CV, but that does not sound as if that is what WG intended? But if you enjoy what you describe, good for you.
  10. I'll just cut and paste from a previous thread: Bad Luck? You really need to understand your luck probably matches what many people have experienced (I have had nothing different or unique during this event, than I get in everyday containers). The event is 'Much Ado about Nothing' tbh. To get money all WG need to do is have a small sample of the community become the 'lucky winners', as you put it. Throw in those that are willing to pay for the premium container to increase their luck and already you have the 'lucky' haves and the 'unlucky' have nots. When we view those perceived to be 'blessed' and others that are not, we often want to view ourselves as being one of those that fall into the 'worthy of such luck' group. And if life doesn't give you that luck when you clearly deserve it, life seems less fair the longer it goes on, until at some point some will buy their luck. It is a clever approach and what makes companies able to earn so much money off of ridiculously low chance loot boxes etc. We all want to believe we are worthy! The thing to realise is that some people on this Earth can fall in poop and still come up smelling of roses; it is what it is my friend - life! Congratulate those with the luck rather than get bitter and move on.
  11. _WaveRider_

    Hey Wee Gee - your latest patch SUCKS

    Or maybe it is just the number of Randoms playing in CO-OP to accomplish a mission and bringing bad play with them? No disrespect to anyone but I have seen it time and time again, where many Random players do not think about the win, but rather their own mission. This often sees them get killed because of their over confidence in 'just dropping into Randoms to complete a task'.
  12. _WaveRider_

    Bad luck protection

    Bad Luck? You really need to understand your luck probably matches what many people have experienced (I have had nothing different or unique during this event, than I get in everyday containers). The event is 'Much Ado about Nothing' tbh. To get money all WG need to do is have a small sample of the community become the 'lucky winners', as you put it. Throw in those that are willing to pay for the premium container to increase their luck and already you have the 'lucky' haves and the 'unlucky' have nots. When we view those perceived to be 'blessed' and others that are not, we often want to view ourselves as being one of those that fall into the 'worthy of such luck' group. And if life doesn't give you that luck when you clearly deserve it, life seems less fair the longer it goes on, until at some point some will buy their luck. It is a clever approach and what makes companies able to earn so much money off of ridiculously low chance loot boxes etc. We all want to believe we are worthy! The thing to realise is that some people on this Earth can fall in poop and still come up smelling of roses; it is what it is my friend - life! Congratulate those with the luck rather than get bitter and move on.
  13. _WaveRider_

    In-game Banter & Ribbing

    I always find many who 'talk banter' often adopt a higher threshold when giving it out, than what they are prepared to take when receiving.
  14. Wait for it.....but she's free! Free apparently covers laziness when there is no other explanation.
×