Jump to content


  • Content Сount

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles


Community Reputation

11 Neutral

About Guy_Number_One

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    United States of America

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Guy_Number_One

    If Giulio must be hit with a nerf--

    We can all agree that the GC is unbalanced and OP. Unfortunately, CCs and supertesters repeatedly told Wargaming that the GC was way too good, but they ignored them. If this change does go through, many customers will be angered and trust will be lost in the company. We are all VERY worried. This could just be the first of many money-making schemes that are bad for the players. How long until all premiums are OP? How long until WG nerfs all the ships we spend our money on? Will their be a new premium ammunition added? Will it become 100% pay to win? Will it go the way of World of Tanks? After all the controversy that has happened recently, a premium post-sale nerf is the last thing we need. CVs are unbalanced as hell, Ranked brought out a lot of harsh feelings, and recent premiums *cough cough* *Stalingrad, T61, Le Terrible, Alaska* *cough cough* have been utterly overpowered, complete crap, or delayed far beyond the initial release date. If anybody from WG reads this, I truly do love your game, but please, PLEASE focus on the here and now. The CV rework and player feedback needs 100% of your attention, not anything else. Give us what we want, not what you think we need (you get a hell of a lot of money out of it!) Our happiness and trust will keep this game going for a long time, and the number one thing that will keep us happy and content is perfecting aircraft carriers.
  2. Guy_Number_One

    Italian Cruiser Line up that Should Be

    I really want the Italian cruisers, contrary to most player I LOVE the Abruzzi. However, I doubt Zara will be T9, its a 1920s ship. I think they will put Trento at T7, Zara at T8, one Ansaldo project at T9, and the other at T10.
  3. Guy_Number_One

    Small way of fixing the Italian Cruisers

    Duca Delgi Abruzzi is my favorite T7 ship tied with Myoko. It requires a unique playstyle that is not one of the traditional cruiser, and I usually do very well in it. It is a VERY good ship in the right hands and doesn't really need any buffs. Play it like a Russian DD mixed with an IJN cruiser mixed with a British cruiser. You murder DDs and enemy cruisers, can tank with the heal, have good DPM, good concealment, and AMAZING maneuverability. Constantly wiggle while supporting your DDs and occasionally use islands. In addition, it is fitted for many situations; it has def aa to disrupt plane attacks (that aa is GARBAGE besides this though) and hydro to spot torpedos and ships. Also, you can mount a spotter plane if you would like to extend the range. Try to stay from 10-15km from your targets, and CONSTANTLY through those damn sea mines at your enemies. The torpedos have a short reload and good range; it is highly recommended that you launch them whenever you can, even if your just guessing where maybe possibly the enemy DD could go in the future. Also, a 30mm plate runs all the way up the bow, making citadelling you from the front hard. Due to the crappy side armor, and bad rear firing arcs, attempt to remain angled away from your oponent or wiggle that back turret to fire. You are a counter to DDs and Cruisers, not BBs because of that bad fire chance and big citadel. You can deal with CVs because of that guaranteed def aa and good rudder, but you won't shoot more than a few planes down. If these are the traits of the future Italian line, I'm going to love it. Imagine the T8 Zara class having a 7.5 second reload on 203mm Guns? That sounds pretty nice to me, even if you sacrifice aa and HE fire chance. The Italians seem to be a manueverable, low range, bad aa, great DPM, have unique torpedos, consumables for many situations, bad fire chance, and overall fun line.
  4. Guy_Number_One

    Amazon Pay not working ISSUE!

    I've been searching for a while to a solution for this problem. Nothing at all. It does make me feel good that at least I'm not the only one. However, the option ISN'T EVEN THERE ANYMORE!!
  5. Guy_Number_One

    CV Rework Feedback

    If I knew nothing of the current system, I would say this looks like a good direction from CVs, and even though it has problems, I am sure they will be fixed. This looks fun, action filled, and unique. Overall, my opinion is positive. The thing is, I have knowledge of CV gameplay as it currently is. WG could fix the current RTS system, and they would have more than enough players, the thing that drove players away CVs was 100% NOT THE FACT THAT IT WAS RTS. Many players suggested ways to fix the CVs but nothing ever happened. 1. USN CVs (which are played a lot more by less skilled players,) are worse than IJN ones. The IJNs have 2 fighter squads to the USN's 1 at T7 and 8, making it nearly impossible to gain air dominance. Also, IJN CVs can cross drop at every tier, while USN ones can only do it at T10. In addition, the USN "national flavor" of having better bombs isn't really true because the IJN reticle is so much smaller, guaranteeing a hit while the USN dive bombers are even MORE RNG based. 2. The UI is bugged, outdated, and hard to use. 3. Premium CVs are usually better than in game ones, things like Graf zeppelin bombs, Saipan's insanely OP fighters, and Enterprises superior flight setup are things that could be easily fixed through nerfs and buffs to in-game ships. 4. AP bombs are stupidly good against certain ships, but useless against others. It is bad game design to have a weapon that provides no counter play to some types, but ineffective against others. 5. The fact that T4/5 cannot have access to manual drops may be the biggest reason of them all. Players will not learn at T6 how to do so, and will probably lose horrifically to more skilled players. If WG is worried about seal clubbing, just lower the damage numbers of torpedos and bombs!! 6. Players aren't taught anything at all. Simple tutorials would go a long way. I have seen T8 CV players who still use auto drops and have no idea how to even change the angle of the drops, making them near useless. 7. T5 CVs with no manual controls facing T6s is unspeakable. It is incredibly angering and unbalanced, but the most tilting thing for me is that it COULD BE SOOOOO EASY TO FIX. 8. Skill gap. However, this could be mitigated greatly if the above reasons were fixed. 9. CV economy is pretty terrible, you can carry a team to victory but do much worse than what you would do in other classes. 10. Perma-spotting. If AA was made exponential, no planes would be able to hover in certain ships AA for long, even if it had AA as weak as a Minekazes. Alright so I know the above information is pointless, but it does a good job of demonstrating known problems with the current system that, for the most part, could have been easily fixed. I DO NOT like that instead of fixing something that is broken for a limited cost, they decided to throw the whole thing out and spend more money on a controversial system. It looks like a good system, but still. They will lose players because of this, which is unfortunate. Of course, they will also gain players. However, think about the number of players they could've gained if they JUST FIXED THE ABOVE PROBLEMS. If you are not a CV player, you will like this. If you know your way around CVs and can use them to some extent (manual drops, cross dropping, spotting, etc.) but are still not very good in them, you will probably be on the edge, such as me. The saddening thing is, the Unicum players who dedicate time and money to this game will most likely hate it. I almost wish WG could just copy paste this current system into another little RTS game for those CV players, it would be much different without surface ships, but they would still have a use for the old system and could probably make money off of it (World of Aircraft Carriers? Hmmmm? sounds kinda cool.) I think Farazelleth puts it very well in his videos about it, and I hope WG will read this and just realize that a rework was probably not the best answer, but instead balancing the current one. Of course, one comment will not change the mind of an entire company, and I hope they listen to the community when building the reworked aircraft carriers.
  6. Guy_Number_One

    Premium Ship Review #109 - Stalingrad

    Alrighty then. Moskva gains damage through fires, he, and occasionally ap. Battleships usually stick with ap to deal large alpha strike damage (except the Brits.) Stalingrad behaves like a BB since it uses AP. However, it has these giant, short reload, super accurate AP volleys. The thing about Stalingrad is that it has no disadvantage to any one class, so making it a bit squishier in the armor department would allow shells to penetrate this fake ship. Stalingrad has an insane amount of survivability, damage potential, AA (with Def AA,) speed, and utility. Generally, ships sacrifice one of these things for the others. Stalingrad just doesn't, so making this ship a high damage lower survivability (it still has a huge HP pool so this isn't even that big of a proposed nerf) would give other ships a better chance of not only surviving it, but also killing it. The same argument applies for Kronstadt, except all I would do is take its radar away. Also, nobody wouldn't play Stalingrad even if you nerfed it back to something like the Kronstadt. They both offer a different playstyle, so comparing them isn't usually accurate. DDs can do 20k damage in one game but cap 3 different key areas and be as effective as a BB doing 200k damage. As it currently is Moskva has very little going for it. Also, battlecruisers should not be strong against DDs, since BBs aren't.
  7. Interesting.... This should have priority over everything except the CV rework and balancing ships
  8. Guy_Number_One

    Premium Ship Review #109 - Stalingrad

    If you took the radar off of Kronstadt, she would be close to balanced. If you took EVERY PIECE OF 50MM PLATING off of Stalingrad and radar, she would be balanced. I doubt WG will ever remove the communist supremacy that is 100% historical and real though *cough cough* Kutuzov, Gremyaschy, Kronsdadt, Stalingrad, Nikolai, Bogatyr (if you look back at the statistics of this ships guns you would agree compared to the other ships in the tier)
  9. I don't understand why WG won't make BB shells instantly overpen 19mm or less. This would put things like the Khaba at a disadvantage (which is ok, BBs need some counter to that thing) and all other DDs would be fine! Of course, the German DDs have the disadvantage of eating AP penetrations, but I think their size disadvantage is fine. This seems like a pretty easy thing for WG to do, and I'm not sure why it hasn't been implemented yet.
  10. Guy_Number_One

    How does the Henri IV compare to the Saint-Louis?

    The Henri IV gives you INSANE AP which is extremely satisfying, Soviet DD levels of speed, and because of its higher health pool and some 30mm plating it is a big tankier. I would say that these pros definently come with a disadvantage compared to the previous heavy cruisers; the reload isn't as comfortable. Having a reload above ten seconds at T10 just does't feel as gun-boaty as the Saint Louis did. Overall though, the Henri is a very good ship that changes the play style a little bit.
  11. Guy_Number_One


    Why are CVs currently unpopular? 1. You make less money than other classes. There are just some things like this that make you want to scream at WG, reasonless, angering mechanics. Conqueror, for example. 2. Premium CVs are BETTER than the silver counterparts (if you disagree, their winrates are always better and offer more quirks that make them BETTER, not necessarily EASIER to play.) 3. You get uptiered? Hahahaha you can't attack half the ships in the queue because their AA is too strong. I've seen games where all you can do is spot, and the literal only ship you can attack is the enemy CV. It's like the radar meta but worse. 4. You just finished your T5 CV grind, and now you're introduced to manual controls. People who know how to use them will destroy you, and you were never taught how to do this in the lower tiers to supposedly prevent sealclubbing. (I think thats a slightly [edited] reason, because now players turn away from CVs after T5.) 5. If you picked American carriers, then congrats! They are worse than the Japanese on every server at every tier! You can't even cross-drop until T10. (If you disagree, again look at the winrates, kills, and damage.) 6. Losing a game is often blamed on the CV, even if you did all that you could. 7. There might always be that one DD that completely ignores the caps and goes around the map to kill you, or the enemy CV could send all his planes on the map border to delete you (I know its the players fault, but this is something that can completely turn a player off from CVs.) 8. The final reason is that your reserves at mid to low tiers can be really restricting. It is historical and has some merit to it, but there are situations where you lose a few planes and can't even make a full squadron again. Even for experienced players, it can be HARD to save ever little plane and make sure you can attack more than 3 times a battle.
  12. Guy_Number_One

    Why American Carriers are so Bad

    United States aircraft carriers have have a lower winrate than all of the competition on all servers at every tier (except for T8 on the RU server, the Graf Zeppelin with only 13 battles on it is worse than the Lexington.) You'd think that WG would fix this, since this has been a problem for a very long time. But instead they nerfed the Midway and buffed the Haku, which was the most recent "carrier balance." I know that they don't want to do anything with cvs before the rework, but would it really be that hard to just change up one aspect of a few ships, such as the flight deck configurations? I don't think so. Its funny how the American cvs are supposed to have better bombs, but since the dispersion circle is larger they end up doing the same as their Japanese counterparts. Another strength of the Americans is they have more fighters per squad, but they have less fighters than the Japanese at almost every tier, especially when they can chose the AS option. So there goes another "strength" out the window. If people played aircraft carriers more, I think WG would do something about this, however there are so few voices on this subject which means that nothing will happen.
  13. Guy_Number_One

    You're in Charge of Premium Ship Releases for 2019

    You are completely correct. However, WG figured out how to move Jean Barte to T9 so... Maybe?
  14. Guy_Number_One

    You're in Charge of Premium Ship Releases for 2019

    I like most of what has been said here. However, a lot of these premium are just clones of ships that are already in game. I believe that the idea of a Pan-European tech tree that includes Dutch, Austro-Hungary, Greek, and Spanish ships would be enough to make a cruiser line. Also, I think that WG could easily do a British BB split in the low tiers for all of the other classes that they built. Maybe we could get alternative ships from T3 to T6 (including HMS Dreadnought and battlecruisers) that wouldn't fire HE but instead would have good AP. Making partial lines never bothered me, for example the alternative IJN DD line ending at T8 was ok. WG could make so many lines that just end in the mid tiers, which would grant many other nations recognition beyond premiums.
  15. I believe, based on the Duca and Abruzzi, that WG is going for a DPM line that deals well with DDs and Cruisers, but bad with BBs. This is because they have pitiful fire chance and big citadels. Also, since they can carry def aa and hydro, they will be a line with lots of utility. Their armor will probably be good high tiers (the Zaras had a great belt thickness and the T9 and T10 paper ships should be based on Italian plans that look like well armoured big cruisers.) I've played a number of games in the Abruzzi, and she fits a close range DD hunter quite well but also has great velocity. They will probably be like Russian cruisers with better concealment, worse range, better maneuverability, worse HE, and different consumables.