Jump to content

DesslockVonKraken

Members
  • Content Сount

    41
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    6027
  • Clan

    [TR3TA]

Community Reputation

53 Good

About DesslockVonKraken

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Before Update 0.11.6, the Free XP calculation was directly linked to the Ship XP gained during the match, that is, Ship XP bonuses influenced the Free XP gain, however, this supposedly changed, so, how is the current Free XP calculation?
  2. DesslockVonKraken

    Patrie in co op

    Is it true that Patrie will only be released in the 0.11.9 update, or is this just speculation?
  3. New game rule: Never trust what the update says.
  4. DesslockVonKraken

    Convoy, disappointing?

    I'll be blunt, in my opinion, the Convoy event is fun but practically useless. The profitability (XP, Credits) is below the random battles, and the prizes are not very interesting. Personally, I was frustrated, because I loved the theme of the event, but random battles are proving much more profitable. Anyone else having the same impression?
  5. DesslockVonKraken

    Come on WG really??!!

    Wargaming: ...yes
  6. Oh, really? Let's see some reasons: HE Spam -pretty much every consolidated cruiser in the game, every French line DD, and even other battleships. Torpedo Spam - All Chinese line, Japan DD line, and now submarines. Carriers - CV usually spend the entire game farming battleships and forgetting about the rest. "The battleship is not advancing"...WHY SHOULD THEY ADVANCE?! You throw tons of steel at a cruiser or DD and from the overpen, however, a ship that is smaller than the Yamato's guns fires at the CHIMNEY of any battleship every 2 seconds, generates flame and sinks the vessel. If an allied battleship asks you to stop farming the enemy battleship and kill the enemy DD that is holding the front, will you give up your damage to help a random ally? If yes, you are less than 2% of the players. When was the last time you entered a game and thought: I'm going to focus on killing enemy DDs, so the battleships can advance without difficulty? When was the last time you saw an Aircraft Carrier supporting the advance of battleships? Do you want to understand why the battleships weren't advancing? Just play 15 Hannover matches, and you'll understand. Do you want to understand why battleships are at the bottom of the map? Make just play 15 Satsuma matches, and you will understand. All front battleships like the Russians and Germans are basically walking grills. DD and CV have the entire game at hand, they are definitely the classes with the biggest impact on the game, even the number of cruiser players is decreasing drastically. You are complaining with a full belly.
  7. DesslockVonKraken

    If you can not say anything good

    That is, following its concept, "constructive criticism" boils down to absolutely nothing relevant in the mechanics or functioning of the game. In other words, "just accept that everything is ok". Not to mention that your theory of "Wargaming's intentions" is questionable, because if that were the case, the artillery rework in World of Tanks would never have happened, which completely changed the artillery mechanics. Furthermore, changes in a game mechanic that generate widespread and constant complaints is definitely a practice followed by online game companies that seek the constant presence of the player. We're not talking about "determining how Wargaming is doing its business", no one here is asking for something ridiculous like stop selling premium ships or anything like that, it's about changes to problematic mechanics. Of course, if the game is perfect for you, then there's no point in the debate at all.
  8. DesslockVonKraken

    If you can not say anything good

    There is definitely no lack of constructive criticism on the forum, especially about the AA system - which is a subject that has been debated for YEARS, and now also about Submarines - which will certainly also be a subject that will be debated for YEARS. So I will list here a basic summary of what has already been said several times: (I'll exclude any "historical reality" arguments because Warships isn't limited to that.) Note: It is important to remember that here on the forum there was a poll asking if they wanted submarines in the game, and the final result was "no". That's because the game already has several balance problems, the submarines simply became another problem. First - Torpedoes guided by "radio signal", really?! Torpedoes are the only projectile in the game that doesn't have RNG in its trajectory and effect, and that's an important point. Have you ever seen a Warships advertising video that shows a torpedo being ricocheted? Well, that only exists in advertising. So... now we have extremely fast torpedoes that can make island turns and follow a target, there's no way this is balanced, the concept itself is broken. Second - Why can't Aircraft Carriers have anti-submarine squadrons? If I'm a Conqueror I can magically spawn a Catalina plane that will drop depth charges, but can't a carrier have a squadron that drops depth charges? Third - Using the damage control system to remove the "ping" (the signal that the torpedoes follow) is definitely ridiculous, it's not like due to the entry of the submarines the HE system of the game disappeared like magic. And there are ships that have a limited number of damage control systems. All the solutions made to these simple topics were palliatives... the most ironic one was the "reduced turning radius of torpedoes", my God... they just shouldn't make turns... Finally, I'm not going to discuss the concept of Spot of the Sumarines, because it doesn't matter, after all, if this is debated, the DDs will have to enter the discussion, my only complaint is that Hydroacoustics should be more effective, by basic logic.
  9. DesslockVonKraken

    If you can not say anything good

    Honestly, I don't see any reflections of this in the game's mechanics. The "AA dilemma" is a better drama than any TV series because it's been going on for years, and the only thing that's changed in the meantime is that AA is just getting more and more useless. Nakimov is pretty much a tier 11 and certainly won't change for months...
  10. DesslockVonKraken

    If you can not say anything good

    Yes... "trash suggestions" such as: Submarines not having guided torpedoes, and other useless things like AA that serves to defend the ship and not to serve graphic decorations...
  11. DesslockVonKraken

    If you can not say anything good

    In fact the Forum is technically useless. "constructive criticism"? Wargaming never takes players' opinions into consideration for absolutely anything. They only change something when the situation is absurdly problematic, or when money is involved. Any suggestion or productive discussion here is a waste of time, unfortunately.
  12. DesslockVonKraken

    World of Tanks-style economy?

    I think this is a shot in the foot, especially in Warships. World of Tanks is an old and consolidated game, it was a pioneer, until today it has little competition, simply because there are not many companies invested in this game model, however, the fact is that WoT, unfortunately, has always been a mercenary, and above all All in all, it's a well-built game - personally, I only stopped playing because it became ridiculous to sustain the game's spending. On the other hand, World of Warships only has one big advantage: It has zero competition. Unfortunately, the game is currently extremely broken and has mechanics issues that have been ignored for years, and the developers don't care about that, WoT is a game that focuses on player skill, but in WoWs the focus is RNG, there is no real ballistic logic, everything works based on "Wargaming Logica", for example: - There is no "game" against carriers, everything is 100% automatic, the only thing you can do is try to dodge the attacks, but the carrier can easily deal with that, especially if it's an F.D.R. - The best parallel to this in WoT is the artillery, before they were focused on damage, but this completely broke the game, and didn't require any skill from the artillery player, well they fixed that, completely altered the artillery gameplay, now, it is focused on support, still dealing damage but limited, and requires more game sense from the player. - What's the point of the overpen idea? The more poorly armored the ship, the more easily it avoids damage from large-caliber weapons, even if the shot is at the center of the ship. In WoT, if your tank is fragile you'll have to deal with it, if you're a light tank, it's hard to spot, but any shot that hits you will really hurt. - In Warships, when you fire with main batteries, 60% of the firing result is RNG and 40% is your aim, that's why Sigma exists, and that's why crucial data like AP shell penetration doesn't they are official numbers presented in the game, that is, when you shoot with your cannons, the game rolls the dice and you can only hope for a good number. And worse, this varies by class, for example, it is a fact that the fire of battleships is much more inconsistent than that of cruisers. Considering this, making the game expensive to maintain, in my opinion, will simply generate the loss of players and limit the game even more. It is worth saying that I am not saying that WoT is a perfect game, it has many problems in its mechanics, the fact is that Warships has even more problems, to the point that the game no longer has any military logic, and these problems are completely ignored by developers.
  13. DesslockVonKraken

    World of Tanks-style economy?

    It is precisely this "rebalancing of the economy" that scares me. First because Warships doesn't know how to balance anything, let's be straight, the game has been completely broken for a long time, all you have to do is have a "meta ship" and learn to play it decently, and the game is yours. Second, because from what I've seen, certain bonuses that the camouflages currently give in the future "will be part of the ship", that is, it will be a hidden number, and Warships is not reliable, the only certainty is that it will be a disaster, no one is going to like it and they're going to make a post saying, "We've looked at each other and we've seen that everyone is very satisfied", just like they've been doing since the start of submarine testing.
  14. DesslockVonKraken

    World of Tanks-style economy?

    For those who don't know, WoT's economy has always been "mercenary", this can be easily exemplified based on the fact that the game has "premium ammo", however, the important point is that in World of Tanks the highest level tanks are extremely costly, until recently it was common for you to have to play with premium tier 8 tanks to merely sustain your tier 10 tanks. So far, Warships are obviously different, a level 10 ship with a permanent camouflage is self sustaining, and a camouflage is infinitely cheaper than a prize ship. However, with the changes happening, Warships is reportedly trying to limit players' silver income. Of course, according to Warships advertisements, "player profits will not be affected", but they have proven themselves time and time again that they can't be trusted. Is it possible that in the long run a World of Tanks-style economy will simply be established?
  15. DesslockVonKraken

    This Is Why Many Players Feel The Game Is Rigged Against Them At Times

    No, no, it's going to be fun to see him try.
×