Jump to content

guns_at_last_light

Members
  • Content Сount

    863
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

  • Clan

    [-GT-]

Community Reputation

395 Excellent

About guns_at_last_light

Recent Profile Visitors

1,841 profile views
  1. guns_at_last_light

    WG, please revise and create new maps.

    While I understand that WG may be working on the underwater environments for existing maps so that they can introduce subs, their production of maps was fairly anemic for years. There was one new map in 2020 (Northern Waters), two in 2019 (Crash Zone Alpha, Greece), and one in 2018 (Sleeping Giant). Ideally there would be 4 or more new maps per year, but now that maps also have to have underwater modeling I doubt that would happen. I have spent a boatload on this game, but stopped because its the same maps over and over and over again. The lack of new maps makes playing new ship lines boring, so I wind up playing the old standbys and call it quits after a few games.
  2. guns_at_last_light

    A (very) brief experiment with Juliet Charlie flags

    The annoying thing about detonations isn't that they happen at all as much as they happen to a specific class, destroyers, far more than any other class. DD players must make a choice with module 1 whether to not blow up thanks to RNG or protect their armaments, which are far more fragile than the modules of other classes. Destroyers are the only ship class that really has to make these considerations. I would prefer WG balance module slot options so that there's a bit of a tradeoff between types of protection. Rather than each module being 100% focused on armament, survivability, or detonations, have each module option emphasize one type of protection more than the others. For example, it could look like this: Heavy on armament, but some survivability and detonation Heavy on survivability , but some armament and detonation Heavy on detonation, but some survivability and armament In some ways this is kind of like what some of the ships had in Big Hunt.
  3. As an experiment, I stopped running detonation flags on my DDs to see if the "this happens once every 100 games" adage was somewhat accurate. I didn't use Magazine Mod 1, but also didn't didn't include any flags that increase the chance of detonation. I detonated twice in 10 games: once in the Halland and once in the Z-52. Both from shells fired by another DD (Ostero and Shima), and in both cases I was between 25% and 50% HP. While the sample size is obviously way too small and this is not how you design a good experiment, it was still kind of funny in a "why on earth is this mechanic still in the game?" sort of way. UPDATE: I continued the experiment today. I didn't use Juiliet Charlie or the Magazine Mod 1. Was detonated by a NC that hit the back of my Halland with HE. I was above 50% HP. The sample size is still small, but 3 detonations in fewer than 20 games definitely seems off.
  4. guns_at_last_light

    Big Hunt is stupid

    The only part that I find somewhat annoying is the Flyfires. They know the instant you fire and where the shells/torps will go, and have insane reaction speed and maneuverability. It isn't worth going after the Aurora anymore since the odds of dying are so high, and the rewards are so low. May as well camp by the exit point. They should have scaled the rewards each update. For example, sinking the Aurora and surviving should now be worth 20k and not 10k.
  5. guns_at_last_light

    Any new maps EVER going to come?

    WG released one new map in 2020 (Northern Waters), two in 2019 (Crash Zone Alpha, Greece), and one in 2018 (Sleeping Giant). Now that they are working on underwater modeling for subs, I have serious doubts that we'll see much in the way of content other than new ships. The bummer is that I would be much more willing to buy a new ship if I knew that I wasn't going to be playing in the same couple of maps over and over again.
  6. Seeing as players who purchased a premium camo for Moskva were hosed despite the solutions being simple (e.g. refund doubloons or give a free perma camo for the Petro), I have serious doubts that WG will provide a captain with equivalent skill points.
  7. I've seen an increase in players from clans in Argentina, Chile, Peru, and Brazil. I'm stoked that more people are playing, but was wondering if having a server closer to them would help with load ins. They seem to load in substantially slower than everyone else, if not AFK, and I imagine that has to do with things pinging around.
  8. Only two camos don't provide both dispersion and detection bonuses - all other camos include both - and no camo provides more than the base dispersion and detection bonuses (e.g. there is no -5% detectability range at sea, only -3%). Since all other camos focus on economic bonuses of varying degrees, and no camo provides better dispersion and detection bonuses, it would stand to reason that WG may consider camos to be primarily about game economy. It's also worth noting that new players unlock Random battles before they unlock camo and flags, meaning that veteran players playing low tier games will have access to things that their opponents may not have unlocked. This is in addition to the veteran players ostensibly being better at the game than new players, potentially having ships no longer available, and maybe running a 21 point captain. While I agree that good players should remember to use camo, I don't believe that this is a sufficient reason to not bake in dispersion and detection bonuses. As already shown, WG considers camos to be predominately about economics. As for whether it would be preferable to have a skilled teammate who forgets camo or an unskilled teammate with camo, I don't think that the argument has any impact on whether dispersion and detection should be baked in to ships. The focus should be entirely on camo access and the fact that WG doesn't tinker with dispersion or detection rates and focuses solely on economics.
  9. The problem is that WG wants players to spend silver for basic levels of detection/dispersion, but the punishment for not doing so is felt by both the player and the team that that player is assigned to. Ideally, any opportunity cost for camo use would only be felt by the player. For example, not using camo that increases XP gains.
  10. WG should remove the detection/dispersion benefits from camo, leaving camo to be about economic bonuses and appearance changes only. Creating a scenario in which a player can forgo free camo that reduces dispersion or detection only serves to punish the player and the teammates that that player is randomly assigned to. Players may not know that they should add camo (remember, there is almost no training available in WOW), may run out of the "free stuff", or may not have realized that their ship didn't have camo equipped. This small mistake impacts this entire team. The only drawback to this idea - and there is no drawback for WG - is for players. When I see a teammate without camo, my immediate guess is that this player is not good and thus cannot be trusted. If there is a base camo built in I wouldn't know ahead of time that this player probably stinks.
  11. guns_at_last_light

    WOWS End of life?

    This game can continue to be milked for years and years. It will never have millions of players, but can have thousands. The key is maintaining a core of maybe 30k globally - tiny by gaming standards - and keep operations bare bones. It is incredibly cheap to design and release new ships, and because operations are based in developing countries the euros and dollars mean much, much more. This is why we don't see new maps, game engine fixes, or really anything you'd expect from AAA games.
  12. guns_at_last_light

    Ranked system is busted.

    Adding a "roll me back to previous league" option for Silver and Gold seems something that shouldn't take much in the way of development resources, and would allow players not enjoying their league to fall back. This may take care of some of the population issue in Silver and Gold, though is not the same as forcing people down to a lower league because they aren't good enough.
  13. guns_at_last_light

    Ranked: An Unpopular Opinion

    The new format is interesting, though they likely wanted to adjust things to seem new rather than actually be new. They didn't make any adjustment to the star system, which was far and away the issue that most players had with the game mode. It is like Philip Morris rebranding itself as Altria: we all know that they still make the same stuff.
  14. guns_at_last_light

    Hidden Big Hunt Achievement?

    I got the Breaking the Eighth Wall achievement, but it seems as if it may be something you only get once. The second time I went to the little arena area in the NW corner of the map, I got nothing.
  15. guns_at_last_light

    Its Been a Couple Months, Went Back to Kansas

    I'm not against a 40 second reload, since it at least makes things interesting. I'm used to having to sit around for a long time for torpedoes. The problem is that the guns performed poorly. If I wait 40 seconds I expect the guns to be better than guns that have a sub-40 second reload.
×