Jump to content


  • Content Сount

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles


Community Reputation

149 Valued poster

About Gnomestroy

  • Rank
    Chief Petty Officer
  • Insignia

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Actually, scratch that. I haven't played a single game for over a month, and I do not plan on playing WoWS anytime soon. I'm posting this now because this forum needs input from players who have ACTUALLY quit the game. see ya.
  2. But then people will be even more annoyed by the fact that they have to actually put effort into countering airplanes!
  3. The two main issues with AA in its current state appears to be that 1. Sector reinforcement is almost negligible for destroyers and other ships with very low average AA dmg. Even if sectors are perfectly synchronized with the plane's movement, DDs are not going to shoot any planes down unless it's a lower tier CV, or the player is terrible and runs into a couple of flak clouds. 2. Reinforcing sectors properly, and doubling the AA DPS will not prevent CVs from landing the first bombing run (in almost any ship) , because the constant AA damage is spread across the entire squadron, meaning the more planes in the squad, the less effect AA has on planes. If sector selection does not increase the constant damage, but rather triples the amount of flak, then both of these problems would be greatly mitigated. Destroyers will receive a buff in their AA, and combined with their quick sector switching times would allow them to adequately counter CV planes. CVs would no longer be as afraid to attack BBs, because their sector reinforcement time is far longer, and they can be "baited" into reinforcing the wrong side. Furthermore, the accuracy of the bombers will be greatly reduced, because the CV player will have to dodge more flak than before.
  4. Wait the defenders are bots?!?!
  5. I've played about 5 games and I was attacking in all of them
  6. Gnomestroy

    Least favorite T10?

    I don't have any tier 10 ship yet, but currently grinding for the Yueyang and the Gearing. Seeing these ships being mentioned in this thread saddens me.
  7. Gnomestroy

    3 carriers on a team is to much

    WG said in a Reddit post (can't find it now) that they've put a soft cap of one CV per team in high tier games. Not sure about tier 4. That being said, I have hundreds of games in tier 4-5 since the rework (including about 40 games in the Langley) and I have never been in a game with 3 CVs
  8. Gnomestroy

    CVs Still Broken

    try dodging
  9. when did I ever suggest that giving player control over AA would be a good decision?
  10. People dislike fighting airplanes because Anti-Aircraft mechanic is boring. There's not much involved in shooting down planes besides focusing the AA sector, and activating Def AA, if available. This means the player doesn't have a sense of control over the AA, as the amount of damage done to planes mostly depends on RNG, the skill of the CV, and the build of the ship. So basically, the results of the engagement are decided before the planes were even spotted. Either the ship annihilates the squadron, or the squadron retreats after one bombing run, or the AA is so weak that the squad makes the maximum amount of dives before returning triumphantly. No matter what, there's not much the player can do to increase the effectiveness of AA. And that makes it boring. However, if AA becomes too complicated, then players will get even more annoyed by planes, because this means they will have to turn their attention away from shooting at surface ships. We end up with a dilemma : if the player does not have control over AA, CV players will feel like they are playing a PvE game, while unicum captains of surface ships will be disappointed because skill doesn't do anything against aircraft. If the player has too much control over AA, then surface ship captains will have to get very good at multi-tasking, which is annoying. CV players don't want to play against RNG while fighting against game mechanics, they want to play against players; surface ship players would be fine with having AA controlled by a bot or RNG or some gameplay mechanic, as long as planes are shot down regularly. However, WG can't simply buff AA, because if AA becomes too strong, then CV players will never be able to land a strike, no matter how skilled the CV captain is, or how potato-y the ship captain is. But surface ship players also don't want to fiddle with a complicated AA system in the middle of an intense gunfight. BBs might be fine with having more control over their AA, due to long reload times, but DDs and CLs often can't afford to turn their attention away for even a second. WG can't simply buff AA either, because if AA becomes too strong, then CV players will never be able to land a strike, no matter how skilled the CV captain is, or how potato-y the ship captain is. WG has to choose between giving player more control over AA, or giving them less control over AA. And both options decrease the quality of gameplay. That's the problem.
  11. Gnomestroy

    Never give up

    wow one of the best games I've seen in a long time, nice!
  12. I also have a few premiums from coal or missions - such as the Marblehead, Aigle, and the Hood. I would be fine with WG not nerfing premiums if they also balance underperforming Promo premiums or Coal-premiums, but WG doesn't seem to take those ships seriously. As for the Hood, I have no idea what WG is even trying to do
  13. I wasn't trolling. Why do you think it is unreasonable for me to take WoWS, a free-to-play game, for granted?
  14. Premium time and premium ships are the only things I am short on right now, and IMO both are overpriced. If WG offers, say, $5 for a month of premium, or $20 for a tier 8 premium, then I would probably have spent around $50 in this game already.