Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

  • Clan


Community Reputation

10 Neutral

About Nighteyez

  • Rank
    Petty Officer
  • Birthday 04/06/1958
  • Insignia

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Fresno, CA. USA

    Forcing content on people is what WG does. Look at USN CV's. Forced to use one loadout, and one loadout only.
  2. Graf Zeppelin release any idea?

    Gavroche, LOL 23rd century. I like that. Thanks Panbun for the FB link. I have a FB account, and I have bookmarked it (and liked it). I too was wondering about the Graf Zeppelin, looks like I have plenty of time to save my money then. Even though I am an average CV player at best, (just now getting comfortable with strafing, and manual drops, although most the time I forget to do them) I have decided to own every CV from tier 4 to tier 8, and thanks to the USS Enterprise being moved to the tech tree last month, I am only missing the Graf Zeppelin now. If I played them more, I could try grinding up the tiers to get the 9 and 10's but honestly I don't see that happening as 6 squadrons is all I can handle and sometimes I don't even do that well. So, I will stop at tier 8. I don't really want to free XP my way up both lines to 10 from 8 as I know I would not play them, so I will just own every CV up to 8. And before anyone starts flaming me for free XP'ing my way up. I only did that from 7 to 8. I did the usual grind from 4 to 7.
  3. I agree. I have only been playing for 5 months, and usually it is every captain for themselves. Only a small handful of times, have I ever seen anyone do what you witnessed. Good to see sportsmanship is not dead.
  4. Reporting players at battle's end

    I don't report bad game play as a lot of people are still learning. Unless, as stated above, it is blatantly obvious they are doing it on purpose. I report AFK players, at the end of the battle. I have seen quite a few who have started out AFK but then "come to life" and contribute. Having played CV's I never report a CV player unless he/she is AFK. that is one thankless job, and rarely does anyone give them a compliment. I still play CV's myself, but only in co-op as the bots don't yell at you for every little thing. Anyway, that is off topic. I guess we will never know. My grandson had an incident early this morning, where at the beginning of the battle he did the customary "Good luck, and fair seas" salutation, only to have someone on his team tell him to go eff himself. He took a screenshot of the chat window, and announced he would report him. Later in the battle, that same person TK'd him. He announced again he would report him. At the end of the battle he reported him for bad play, and harassment as well as making a ticket. He was told by WG that they appreciated the screenshot, and disciplinary actions would be taken, but due to their privacy policy they could not discuss what actions those were.
  5. Hello fellow captains, I am just wondering if WG does anything with the AFK reports they get at the end of the battles? Anyone know? That is the only thing I ever report as I never report bad playing, unless the person is going around team killing, I will report that, but I have not seen that except once. However, it seems I am seeing a lot of AFK players, and it is really frustrating, especially if that player is in a CV. So I usually report them. I know some things cannot be avoided, like losing your internet connection, or getting kicked out to the login screen. However, when that happens to me, I try my best to get back in the game and contribute. I am talking about people who are AFK the entire battle. Those I report. And it seems to me that it is a total waste of time, except to make me feel better.
  6. If the Tirpitz is the reward for completing the Battle of North Cape, I wonder why the New Year Raid is in front of the Battle of North Cape? I guess WG wants us to start the campaigns in the middle and work outward?
  7. Ranger/Lex change suggestion

    I agree, or just give it tier 9 TB's. I don't see that as OP.
  8. Hello fellow captains. Just tried to do the New Year Raid campaign on the PT server, and it is impossible. The very first task requires you to be in the top seven XP earners in one battle, either in co-op, random or ranked, which is extremely easy given it can be done in co-op, but the kicker is, it has to be completed in a Tirpitz... A ship that is not available on the public test server. Interesting that they would include that on the PT knowing full well it is not available. And of course, since it is a premium, even if it makes it to the live server, (which it will, everything they put on a test server is already finalized, and ready to implement) only people who spend the $$$ to get the Tirpitz are eligible to complete the mission. Of course, looking at the reward for doing the mission I can see why. The Magnus-S camo from the Halloween scenarios, which I already own. So, I would do it to get the equivalent in doubloons. Still, the question remains, why would you put a campaign on the test server that is impossible to complete because you don't have the required ship? Wait a minute, this is Wargaming we are talking about here. The same people that gave us the Graf Zeppelin before it was ready, and destroyed the USN CV line with only one load out in order to "balance" the CV's... Makes perfect sense now.
  9. Ranger/Lex change suggestion

    Can someone from WG please explain to me (and many others I am sure) why they think giving the Midway tier 8 TB's is a good idea? I understand balancing, but really? two tiers lower? How is the Midway supposed to do any damage against tier 10 BBs when you cannot even get close to them?
  10. Ranger/Lex change suggestion

    I agree with OP. Lexington/Ranger should get 2-1-1 load out.
  11. USN AP dive bombers

    I agree 100% with the idea of allowing CVs the option of switching between AP bombs and HE bombs in battle. After all, every ship in this game has that ability except the CV. Why restrict it to a pre battle decision? I see no reason to restrict every USN CV to only one load out either. When I play, I prefer the AS build, but I know there are those out there who prefer a strike load out. So now we will have neither, and be hampered by the single jack of all trades load out crammed down our throats that will make the gap between IJN and USN CV's even larger. I also agree the AP bombs are not worth it. I tried them on the Lexington on the PST this past weekend and found out they do less damage than the HE bombs. I did like the drop pattern but since they did not perform better than the HE's I no reason to use them.
  12. I played the Ranger just long enough (2 battles I think) on the test server to get to the Lexington and then stayed there for the next 4 or 5 battles, only because I had just bought those two on the live server. I too received all the rewards for the live servers (except the clan battle award) I had already had the Ranger, but sold it after only 4 battles, but decided to repurchase it again, then got the Lexington right before the test server went live, so I wanted to try the load outs. I don't like the fact that we now have no choice in the load outs, and especially the single fighter squadron limitation. I bought the Saipan over two months ago, and I have a feeling, I will be playing her a lot more often once WG stabs the USN CV's in the back when they go live with this unbalanced balancing they speak of. It is obvious by their lack of attention to the soon to be overpowered IJN carrier line, that they have no intention of ever bridging the gap between IJN and USN carriers. I will continue to play USN, but have a feeling it will be Saipan only. Don't have enough games in the Kaga to form an opinion, and my Shokaku experience is very limited at the moment, but since it has the same load outs as the Hiryu which I have over 30 games in, I am guessing it performs the same as the Hiryu. In which case, i am over whelmed with the 6 squadrons. So Saipan it is.
  13. There is no way any sane person can call giving USN CV's one load out balancing. Especially when the IJN CV's are not touched. I have no clue who thought this up, but they need to play USN CV's with this one load out against IJN CV's all day, and let me know how that works for you.
  14. I don't have a problem with the one load out for USN CV's, but I do have a problem with the one fighter squadron part of that one load out. Of course, it forces the CV's to have to try and gain AS with only one fighter squadron, however, the enemy IJN CV's the USN will come up against in those tiers both have 2 fighter squadrons. It makes no sense to me, that we as USN CV drivers, have to live with only one fighter squadron for the first five of our carrier ranks, while the IJN CV driver sails along with no changes to his/her load outs. How is this balancing? Why do we have to wait until tiers 9 and 10 before we can get a second fighter squadron? I do like the fact that they are giving a 2-2-2 load out to the Midway, but I honestly think they should have done that from the Independence on, not wait until the Essex. The Hiryu and Shokaku get that load out at tier 7. USN doesn't get that load out until tier 10. Go figure. I don't know how many people are going to want to grind 5 tiers of CV just to get to the Essex. I just barely made it to the Lexington two days ago. And although I do like the fact that it can equip AP bombs, have you seen the specs on them? They produce less damage than the HE bombs, and of course, have no chance of starting a fire. So why would I want to use bombs that give me less damage, and no fire chance? AP shells give more damage than HE shells in every ship I have played, so it should be that way with CV's bombs. I have played 5 games with the Lexington on the public test server, and found the only way to complete that "Clear Sky" battle requirement of 50k damage to enemy ships is with the HE bomb load out. (BTW, I am an average CV player at best) I think they have it backwards. AP bombs should do the 10k damage, and HE bombs 8k with the chance of starting a fire. As for the 1 fighter only load out. I think that is pure stupidity, knowing full well the enemy CV's will have you outnumbered in every battle unless it happens to be another Ranger/Lexington.
  15. I agree 100%. They keep saying they want to increase the CV players in game, but then they do this. And of course, everyone knows they are increasing DD defensive fire, so that means more ships the CV cannot attack, and don't forget adding AP bombs which don't damage DDs, or deep water torps which don't damage DD's. Pretty bad when a tier 8 USN KIdd, can take out a tier 10 Midway's planes every single time. I bet it has already happened where a Kidd sails straight for the Midway and destroys him because he is totally defenseless to destroyers now. Yeah, that is the perfect way to get players to become CV drivers. And I am aware that WG likes to give lower tier aircraft to some of the CV's in an attempt at balancing them, but really, two tiers lower? No other CV in game gets a punishment like that. This is just my opinion of course (as every post on this forum is really) but I think WG is doing this so the CV population goes down to zero and they don't have to rework anything. Might as well remove them from the game now, and give everyone who bought one their credits/money back and move on, instead of lie to their players about fixing them. No CV's in clan battles? Why not? Because they are getting rid of them, why allow them in clan battles when they are not going to be here much longer? Another interesting thing I see about this is the USN CV plane load outs. I notice they are not readjusting the Japanese plane load outs. So now we are going to have Rangers and Lexingtons with 3 squadrons going up against Hiryus and Shokakus with 6 squadrons. No wonder everyone prefers IJN. They can be everywhere, and the poor USN CV driver is chasing his tail trying to minimize the damage. Maybe I am missing something here, but on paper it doesn't seem to be a fair trade. I have no CV experience higher than tier 7 at the moment with the exception of a small handful of games in the recently purchased Shokaku, I have played against tier 10's as I currently own six tier 8 ships which seem to be constantly up tiered with 10's. However, none of them are CV's except the previously mentioned Shokaku. I was able to buy the Lexington last night, but have no $$$ to upgrade it, so it and the Shokaku will sit in port, or do co-op until I can afford to get the upgrades. Now that I see the changes in DD defensive fire, and what they are doing to the Midway, I think I will stop at tier 8, and just play co-op with them. Then at least I will know what the enemy carrier is going to be, and I know I cannot come up against a 8 squadron Hakuryu in my feeble little 3 squadron Lexington.