Jump to content

CounterErrorism

Members
  • Content Сount

    15
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    11936

Community Reputation

7 Neutral

About CounterErrorism

Recent Profile Visitors

351 profile views
  1. CounterErrorism

    Destroyer XP in T10 ranked

    Also, consider torpedo protection. I landed 7 Zao/Shima torps on a Yamato last night and he didn’t go down. 7 Fubuki torps will drop anything at tier 6. If you are playing Z52 and land a torp for 9-10k on a tier X BB, it’s really nothing. It’s less than 10% of the effective HP pool and equivalent to less than 1.5 full duration fires. Fire frequency for cruisers vs torp ratio for DDs is always going be one sided. Between the HP pools, heals, torp protection and smoke changes we have a lot of factors working against DDs at tier X. Just not sure about the elegant solution to this.
  2. CounterErrorism

    Destroyer XP in T10 ranked

    I agree it’s totally a problem. I think it’s linked to tier more than anything though. At Tier X everybody has huge heals and health pools. A team effectively has to kill 150% of a Yamato or 140% of Zao’s HP pool. That’s a lot of XP to assign damage wise. The preponderance of which is not assigned to DDs. Thus I feel this is really skewing the XP result in the end. Earlier seasons of ranked predate me. I’d be interested to hear from older players about the effect of the heals on XP. It seems like Lo Yang and even Sims were good save your star boats back in the day. Smaller health pools at those tiers with fewer heals. With my earlier post, I just mean to say it’s really hard to change the way XP is awarded without dramatically altering in game behavior. Some people say this will focus people on more team play. I find that unlikely. Gaming of the XP system will certainly occur. This is why WG keeps the system so opaque.
  3. CounterErrorism

    Destroyer XP in T10 ranked

    But what are you advocating? How do you increase DD XP within the current state of the game? Do you want to increase the XP awarded for capping? Then if I cap in a cruiser I’m guaranteed to save my star. Watch people run to the free cap at game start. Spotting? XP for sailing around while your torps reload? Ok, cruisers are going to get a lot of that too. You want a special XP modifier for DDs in ranked? Not sure I like that. Here are some points for clicking battle. I agree the XP currently rewarded is underwhelming. Not sure how to fix this though.
  4. CounterErrorism

    The Ranked Report

    So are we going to start a 10-5 group chat and 5-1 chat so we know if a game is running. I sat in one ten minute queue and had to bounce. It’s pretty painful and will only get worse in 5-1. Let’s not waste our own time here...
  5. CounterErrorism

    up coming Dasha captains

    Americans complaining that a Russian woman, in fact, speaks Russian. I’m sure the EU forums are filled with complaints about Jack Dunkirk and Steven Segal.
  6. CounterErrorism

    The Irony of PotatoVille

    This the healthiest and most productive attitude I have ever seen on the forums. People congratulate themselves on here for dunking on randoms when it really only means you have more time on your hands. You want to be competitive? Play competitive game modes with the best players in the game. Those are your equals in terms of time spent learning the game. Not the 60 year old retires loling around in their BBs in randoms.
  7. CounterErrorism

    Tactical Tip Tuesday - Battleship Formations

    I’m not sure how it plays out in game. Think it through with me. Let’s say you fire a total of 200 shells for a given game just to keep the numbers round. It’s not a terrible approximation really. Cut off 2 minutes at the beginning of the game and maybe 8 minutes at the end. 10 fighting minutes, 2 Monty salvos of 12 per minute. 240 shells. We held our shot a couple times while we were moving around. Whatever, 200 shells per game. A guy landing 30% of his shots gets 60 shell hits while the 25% guy landed 50. Let’s say 5 of those are overpens, eaten by a module or shatters. The other 5 are pens. I have a hard time believing the difference between a really poor BB player (25%) and an average one (30%) is the 5 extra pens. I think the difference is the quality of shot taken. Which circles back to the original point, you have significantly worse shots if your right next to a friendly BB. If you space the map better, you will have better shooting opportunities. This is the difference between good and bad players. Not the 5 shells. What say you?
  8. CounterErrorism

    Tactical Tip Tuesday - Battleship Formations

    What tactical advantage does lining up give you though. Why would you even pursue the strategy? Let’s get closer together so we eat more torpedoes and people can bow tank both of us. Let’s get closer together so we can lose map control and shoot at kiters. The only advantage of playing next to someone is they may eat some damage that you would have otherwise taken and you can shoot at the same target. The main difference between good players and bad players in the game is their ability to defend themselves. This is why tier X is uncomfortable for many. This is also why bad players are arguing for this stick together strategy. “I don’t know how to survive and deal damage without overwhelming force advantage. I better stick with the group.” Furthermore, as I have said before, focus fire is not really a battleship thing. You should take shots of opportunity in battleships. Not blast away at the closest target in front of you. Actually, Main Battery Hit Rates generally fall between 25-35% for tier X bb’s. The lower end being people who are really terrible shots. Most people fall between 27-33%, with unicums at 34-37%. It’s not a huge difference. They may be targeting better spots on your ship or out positioning your for more large salvos. However, in the end it’s still an RNG dispersion based game. They are not landing dramatically more shells than you are.
  9. CounterErrorism

    Tactical Tip Tuesday - Battleship Formations

    Ya, the thing is, your opponent is never better organized than you. Your both random teams of 12. The level of organization of your team is really about the same as your opponents over 1,000’s of games. As you admitted, even if your vocal about it, u can only convince 2-3 boats to vaguely do something that resembles what you want. The thing you can control is where you put your ship to maximize your influence on the battle. Next to your battleship buddy is bad. 4 squares over is better. Additionally, battleships aren’t really focus fire bots. You shouldn’t be slamming rounds into Yamato bows because, “We need to focus fire!” You should be trying to create good shots for yourself and your team by positioning yourself correctly on the map and hitting the shots. Let me put it this way, the difference between the players with the highest win rates and average players isn’t teamwork. Go play a random with OPG or ZR and see if they ever touch the chat box.
  10. CounterErrorism

    Tactical Tip Tuesday - Battleship Formations

    This is really the worst way to play imo. Two battleships next to each other have the same shot. It’s easy for the entire team to angle against both battleships. Furthermore, you are projecting your inflouence over the same squares. Being next to each other also offers no defensive bonus. If you were 3 or 4 squares away from your battleship companion, one of you would have much better shots. You could cover more map and force your opponents to swing their turrets to fire at both of you. The fallacy is that you are harder to sink sailing next to each other. Totally not true. Much easier to sink.
  11. CounterErrorism

    How Will WG Compensate for CW Split Rating SNAFU?

    No, dude I totally understand. It’s not great for you guys to block out 4 hours and sit around. I’m just saying, there aren’t many teams on your level that can compete with you guys. The flip side of that is to unleash you upon the rest of us which isn’t great for you or the teams that can’t compete with you. I’m just saying I think MM is working as intended. It’s grouping teams more tightly onto common competitive ground. That’s slowing the leveling process because their aren’t as many easy wins. I just happen to think that is a good thing. Like Ranked, Typhoon will open its gates to more teams shortly and there will be more games. Unfortunately, you will be in Hurricane by then. Skill gap is real.
  12. CounterErrorism

    How Will WG Compensate for CW Split Rating SNAFU?

    This is Matchmaker acknowledging the skill gap between you guys and the rest of us. Isn’t this what people are always begging for? It is similar to the first couple weekends of ranked. It isn’t a matchmaking problem. The problem is the gulf between the good, the bad and the ugly is so great. If matchmaker gives you 1 minute queues and you club some Storm 3 team, I think the experience is not satisfying for either of you.
  13. CounterErrorism

    How Will WG Compensate for CW Split Rating SNAFU?

    Isn’t that the point though? We have gotten our [edited]kicked by everyone in this thread including BOTES. I agree it is much tougher to get to Typhoon let alone Hurricane this season but isn’t that why you play the mode? The steel is nice but I doubt there are many in Typhoon or Hurricane looking to steel farm. You play the mode for the quality games and competition. I would much rather play good Bravo teams from top clans than stomp Gale teams to get points. That makes the accomplishment of getting to and staying in Typhoon real. Typhoon shouldn’t be a participation medal. I agree with Show Me The Cits that it would be nice and appropriate to league lock Alpha and Bravo. Bravo feels like seal clubbing as you level it. Otherwise, I think the matchmaking has been a big improvement. More competitive games. Win or lose, are a plus for me.
×