Jump to content


  • Content Сount

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

  • Clan


Community Reputation

38 Neutral

About partridge_in_a_pear_tree

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. partridge_in_a_pear_tree

    Update 0.10.3, Godzilla vs Kong

    imagine releasing an april fools joke 2 days early, then a real announcement on april fool's day
  2. partridge_in_a_pear_tree

    Smaland missiles & rockets

    veeeeeeeeery unlikely
  3. partridge_in_a_pear_tree

    PT 0.10.3, balance changes.

    Good changes. I don't mind rebalancing "special" ships at all, especially with how much some of them over-perform. As long as they don't whack them with a sledgehammer and just take it slow and reasonable (as seen here), I think it's totally acceptable.
  4. partridge_in_a_pear_tree

    An update on upcoming (?) Deadeye tweaks.

    I wish they'd give us at least some kind of timeline. Trying to decide whether to join a new clan so I can div up and make things less painful in the meantime, or just quit alltogether for the time being...
  5. partridge_in_a_pear_tree

    thanks for the GRIEF WG

    You are not a clown. You are the entire circus.
  6. partridge_in_a_pear_tree

    Developer Bulletin for Update 0.10.3

    No news on the status of Dead Eye rebalancing/removal?
  7. partridge_in_a_pear_tree

    Smaland missiles & rockets

    I agree, that is hilariously stupid. Not just Iowa, but most high-tier battleships and cruisers (they start getting bow sheer) have shells that magically phase through AA gunners, anchors, and a couple dozen feet of steel when firing directly forward at close range. I have no problem with this - it's an arcade game, but why is one ship treated realistically when all the rest are not?
  8. partridge_in_a_pear_tree

    Manual secondaries still worth it on Mass/Georgia?

    I think people overestimate the utility of having both sides firing. That only matters if you've positioned yourself terribly.
  9. Title says it all, can't decide if the 35% accuracy buff is still a good use of 4 points. Is it enough of a bonus over the already-pretty-accurate secondaries to matter? Or are the other skills so obviously better that I shouldn't bother anymore? I know it's still good on German secondaries because they buffed the base accuracy preemtively, but with Mass/Georgia is it even worth considering? And what about the new BFT style-skill that also boosts main battery reload when in secondary range, Close Quarters Combat? LWM said it's hot garbage in her Angry Youtuber Review of battleship skills, but -10% on the main battery has me intrigued. Any thoughts on that one? Even if it's not all that great... is it potentially more worthwhile than manual secondaries? Thanks for any input anyone has on this matter.
  10. partridge_in_a_pear_tree

    Carriers penalised for Concealment Captain skill

    Hahahaha. Please just stop responding to this thread, you embarrass yourself further every time. What you are saying is that you lack situational awareness. And you want the game to change to reflect that. Dare I say it... GIT GUD Also, why is it such a crime that once in a blue moon, a destroyer captain can sneak up on you, when you can murder that same destroyer pretty much every game?
  11. partridge_in_a_pear_tree

    Is it just me or has the rework diminished Battleship impact?

    Of course brawling has always been about exploiting enemy screw ups. But what I see from this patch is substituting one form of bad play (poor positioning close in) for another (hanging back on the B and C lines). My problem with this is not in principle, bad play is bad play. The problem I have with it is that it eliminates the battleship role in being the punisher of said poor play. Battleships, at least for the average player, now take the role of back-line damage dealers with marginal game impact at best. This leaves destroyers and cruisers to do the actual winning. Now, whether this is a good thing or a bad thing depends on what kind of gameplay you enjoy. Someone could easily make the argument that immediately prior to 10.0 battleships had too much power in high tier games. That it was too easy for an average player to master the relative simplicity of battleship play and wreck face. It certainly wasn't an easy time for light cruisers, which went being meta ships to almost nonexistent in the course of a year or so. And with DDs being even harder to play with sky cancer flying around, you could also point to their diminishing influence as a rationale for cutting back battleship influence. I admit that the argument I am making is biased in favor of battleship play not for purely logical, statistical, or spreadsheet reasons. The argument I'm making is that I think a large portion of the community finds close-in action to be a lot more fun and dynamic than a repetetive, stepwise meta where destroyers occupy the front lines, cruisers the middle, and battleships the back. To me, my favorite class has just been made a whole lot less fun to play. I admit that this post was primarily driven by my bitterness to that loss. The main reason I went through with it is because I think a lot of players feel similarly. Finally to your point about the meta being controlled by the playerbase, I mostly agree. The vast difference in ideal playstyle between the NA, EU, RU, and SEA servers is proof of this. But Wargaming must quit denying that they have zero influence over the playstyle. If you add a skill that rewards people for being a certain distance back, it's incredibly predictable than your Average Joe Battleship Captain will try to take advantage of it, and most will do it by staying further back than they need to for longer than they need to. This is basic psychology. For an extreme example that demonstrates what I'm talking about, It's the same mechanism by which New York City reduced violent crime in the 1990s via urban renewal, People are people, but they are quite susceptible to external pressure, even if they don't realize it. Wargaming needs to understand that they have power over how people play, and in this case they negligently flipped the meta upside down with a simple change that probably didn't get enough testing. Typical. Even if they rolled back Deadeye tomorrow, I think the new mindset would be pretty hard to shake, and it would take a little while for the old ways to come back. In closing, I will say that overall I do not think the rework was a bad thing. For both cruisers and destroyers, I actually think the changes benefited them quite a bit. Also, the complaints about secondary battleship nerfs are baseless, if anything the build itself is stronger with the reload buff skill at 4 points. However as I pointed out earlier the new, campy playstyle makes it obsolete, even if it would have been plenty powerful in the old meta. I just really disagree with the implementation of the Deadeye skill, and I very much hope Wargaming will be looking at it closely over the coming months for potential adjustments.
  12. partridge_in_a_pear_tree

    How would you fix CV's?

    This is a pretty good idea. Have slow, weaponless spotter aircraft just like in WW2. Can't fight, but broadcasts enemy positions to the team, and does not take as much damage from AA. Then have the fast, agile, but AA-susceptible dive bombers and torpedo bombers. Can attack enemy surface ships but won't broadcast position data to anyone except the CV. Then it's actually a skill-based system. A good CV player will know when to spot for a team and when to attack. Right now, it's basically just a never ending horde of attack planes with a damage limit based on how much time they have. So stupid. The only real problem with this proposed system is that it will once again increase the skill gap between CV players, so that the team with the better CV could end up with a huge advantage. This could probably be mitigated with little details, like squadron rearm times forcing you to spot some and fight some, and getting more XP for spotting, etc etc etc. Who knows. But on paper, your idea is still better game design than the one WG implemented. I would very much like to see a second CV rework. The first one is almost universally accepted to have made matters worse. And with ideas like this coming from the playerbase, maybe WG should actually listen to public opinion... just saying...
  13. partridge_in_a_pear_tree

    Is it just me or has the rework diminished Battleship impact?

    Exactly. Prior to 10.0, we had a brief honeymoon of push-oriented gameplay. It was really a breath of fresh air from the HE spam meta of yesteryear, and it actually gave battleships a decent amount of influence, if played correctly. Now it's gone again, just like that. Unless Wargaming makes some changes to the skill, we might be back to high-tier passivity forever.
  14. partridge_in_a_pear_tree

    Is it just me or has the rework diminished Battleship impact?

    That's not quite true, prior to 10.0, I did exceptionally well in brawls. I'm a 52.5% winrate player, but my winrate in Massachusetts and Scharnhorst is >65%, with about 100 games played on each. The key to brawling was to do it properly. By using islands to cut off certain portions of the map from firing at you, carefully weighing when to move up based on enemy positioning, and targeting ships in a stepwise fashion (one after another), it was quite possible to do very well in ships like that. If you played your cards right, few ships could kill you in a 1 on 1, especially if you had support, which I found was pretty likely if you led the charge. To see what I mean, check out some of Potato Quality's videos from before the patch. He takes this concept to the extreme. Of course I'm nowhere close to him skill-wise, but he clearly demonstrates the playstyle I'm talking about, and at a Super-Unicum level. Now that's not possible anymore. If you try to move up at all in a battleship, you instantly become a focus target, since other people aren't pushing anymore either. There always used to be a few battleships ships that would push at the beginning, now it's very few, if any. Using islands to cut off enemy fire does not work nearly as good at it used to, because there are far more HE spammers and enemy battleships hidden behind islands, so there's always someone that will be able to shoot at you. With no better target, even a cruiser 20km away firing over two islands will take the shot. Finally, CVs will focus you down a ton. I probably die to carriers in 40-50% of carrier games now, seriously. Most importantly, the targets that used to be so juicy (and taking them down meant winning games) all hide much more than they used to. Cruisers venturing near caps and battleships pushing is rare to see now. You can push, and the enemy will also be so far back that you won't have a target. I'm definitely bitter about the loss of such combat. That's what made the game fun for me, outplaying people at medium range and securing victory. Sure, I can sail around in Thunderer now and rack up huge damage totals, but I don't necessarily want to. It's much more stale gameplay-wise. The only saving grace I have found thus far is doing divisions of brawling battleships. By all pushing at once, the Deadeye peasants in the back of the map can't do much to stop your horde, and you can mercilessly slaughter them one by one. It's a lot of fun, but getting a div together of 3 players with brawling experience doesn't happen every day. I used to be able to take Massa for a spin any old time, now it's for special occasions and Ranked/Clan Brawls only.