Jump to content

Chad_Slava_Enjoyer

Members
  • Content Сount

    33
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    3802
  • Clan

    [BIG_E]

Community Reputation

16 Neutral

About Chad_Slava_Enjoyer

Profile Information

  • Location
    Not In the US
  • Interests
    Living

Recent Profile Visitors

358 profile views
  1. Chad_Slava_Enjoyer

    Game Crashing

    In the course of 3 days, my game crashed 9 times, are there problems with the servers or something else? Ive done 6 restarts, 3 check and repairs and one complete re-install but the game keeps crashing. The problem seems to be server related as only one of the crashes was related to my wifi.
  2. Chad_Slava_Enjoyer

    Fire visual bug

    Today during a battle in the Richelieu I set a Massachussets B with a double fire, about 30 sec later the fire animation or visual effect was still there, yet the dammage was not ticking, as well as no dcp or heal visual effect, I encountered this bug several times before but dissmissed it as something minor, this time however the enemy ship in question should have died which made this bug more enfuriating. Attached the replay file as well. 20220701_150655_PFSB108-Richelieu_16_OC_bees_to_honey.wowsreplay
  3. Just a small poll on general opiñon for subs right now, on both the live server and test server. Feel free to write your opiñon as well.
  4. Chad_Slava_Enjoyer

    A small rant about WG

    Regarding CV's I think that with Superships, Super CV's and Subs, standard t10 cv's look balanced to me. Just look at this flamu video: How are we supposed to counter that, you cant even know if its there anymore because the effect is so short and inacurate. Seriously t10 CV's are actually ballanced compared to the recent additions to the game.
  5. Chad_Slava_Enjoyer

    Japanese submarine line proposal

    You mean dutch ships?
  6. Can we get the original Sansoneti shell tracers back in the game? Just for uniqueness' sake.
  7. Chad_Slava_Enjoyer

    Refunds For Steel Ships?

    After hoplessly trying to get a refund for my Ragnar I realised that there were some things missing from the Refund policy, I know that my chance of a refund is gone but I make this post to help anyone who might make the same mistake as me. I made this post asking for help with the refund and I thank everyone who answered, though no succes was achived. So now for the part where I help the comunity: I attached an image showing part of my latest attempt to get a refund for my 20k steel mistake and I would like to attract the atention of certain comunity managers to the quote, I was told that if the ship was played in more than 5 games the refund would not happen, but where is this information available, how did I not know this before I made my decision to buy the ship. This is vital information that protects the customer from these things happening but Its not there, not in the refund policy not even in the armory. I want to make one last attempt to get this refund and I do not wish to comunicate any rudeness to any WG or WOWS employees but, This crapis important in a buissnes, you need to have every piece of information available to the customer, I do not think that this is a scam by WG but it sure looks like it. I understand that WG doesent make any money from selling steel ships but they dont loose any either by giving people a refund for a ship that they did not enjoy, and after all the whole purpose of playing this game is to have fun and enjoy it right? @Boggzy @Ahskance I hope you see this and help the game and the comunity as a whole.
  8. Chad_Slava_Enjoyer

    Refunds For Steel Ships?

    Last weekend I decided to get Ragnar as my first steel ship, I thought since I had the dd experience with the Halland and Harugumo grinds it would be a good idea. Turns out I hate the Ragnar, not because its a bad ship, but because It gets focused so much that its just not fun to play. Ive played a few battles in it and have not enjoyed it at all. Now for the refund part, Ive heard from friends and clanmates that they got a refund for their steel ship even after having played it. So is it possible or have I thrown away 20k steel? NOTE: If you have gotten a refund for a used steel ship plz PM me I want to know more about how it happened.
  9. Chad_Slava_Enjoyer

    DevBlog 305 - Support Carriers Closed Conceptual Test

    Mines seems like a good adition to the game, like torps, spottable with hydro, at certain ranges, it alows players to dodge them, which adds a level of skill required, for ex. dds spot mines at 0.5km giving them a minimal amount of time to dodge while cruisers and bbs would spot them at longer ranges or even farther away with hydro, i think that direct damage would be a better experience on the reciving end than an inhability to use a universal consumable needed to stay alive. +Mines adds a new oportunity for strategies and makes the game more intricate and challenging which for some people (Including myself) would want, since tbh the game has been getting pretty stale over the past couple of years.
  10. Chad_Slava_Enjoyer

    DevBlog 305 - Support Carriers Closed Conceptual Test

    Tbh Superships and Subs seem like a great addition to the game after this anouncement. Quick mesage to WG: Why, How, Who, decided to even test this stun mechanic, do you even know about the stun mechanic in WOT, do you even know how annoyed people are with that, I think that were getting to the point where it feels like WG is scuttling their own ship; So WG ill ask niceley, stopp adding things to the game, fix the current issues in the game first, then you can add things, but if you add them, think to yourself, will this enrage half of the playerbase and make them bomb the living s##t out of us and our team. If the answer to this is Yes, hold the idea off and ask the player base what they think, last year you talked about the whole "Improving comunication" thing after the fiasco, why not ask the players what they think would be a goof addition to the game. On a personal note, I think that fixing the current issues with the game and giving the playerbase what they actually want would be a lot more profitable than introducing things that completeley alter the game's balance, like subs, superships and now suport cv. So please WG, take your time to think this one through, dont throw money at the idea imediatley, ask for feedback first, because the customer (the playerbase) is the one who keeps you afloat, without us, the game would be nothing, so plaease, be rational, and "comunicate better" with your most important asset, us, the players, the customers. P.S. the stun mechanich isnt the only problem, the chaff than neutralises radar is just silly and usseles, radar is litterly the meta right now and such a radical change would flip the game on its head, the whole concept of support cv is just wrong and needs to be either reworked or just scrapped, and I believe that Scrapping it would be the cheaper option for WG.
  11. Chad_Slava_Enjoyer

    Clan battle poll

    I think that no cv gives more flexibility in terms of teams, we no longer have worry about aa focused ships in our lineups, for example last season we saw atleast 1 halland per team, halland probably has better the best aa for any dd in the game, we saw a lot of aa build worcesters, and a lot of montanas, which are probably there because of their aa.
  12. Chad_Slava_Enjoyer

    Small Poll On The State Of Subs

    Sub skill floor is just too low, lower than t1 ships
  13. Chad_Slava_Enjoyer

    Small Poll On The State Of Subs

    Like normal torps.
  14. Chad_Slava_Enjoyer

    Small Poll On The State Of Subs

    That is actualy a realy good idea, seems balanced.
  15. Chad_Slava_Enjoyer

    Small Poll On The State Of Subs

    Yeah kinda doubted the redaction of that one, I meant for the question to be easyer to detect.
×