Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'ohio'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • World of Warships - News and Information
    • News And Announcements
    • Update Notes
    • Public Test
    • Contests and Competitions
    • Events
  • General WoWs Discussion
    • General Game Discussion
    • Developer's Corner
    • Community Programs Corner
    • Support
  • Off Topic
    • Off-Topic
  • Historical Discussion
    • Discussions about Warships
    • Historical Discussions and Studies
  • Player's Section
    • Team Play
    • Player Modifications
  • International Forums
    • Foro en Español
    • Fórum Brasileiro
  • Contest Entries
  • Contest Entries
  • New Captains
  • Guías y Estrategias
  • Árboles Tecnológicos
  • Fan Art and Community Creations
  • Community Created Events and Contests

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


AIM


MSN


Website URL


ICQ


Yahoo


Jabber


Skype


Location


Interests

Found 4 results

  1. I decided this may be worth posting, because almost every game I've played in my Ohio, someone " often multiple people," will ask about the ship. I know the odds are slim those same players look at the forum, but I haven't really seen anyone posting their thoughts on it post release, and I have yet in fact to meet another Ohio in the same match as me. ( I have seen a few Thunderers.) Therefore, I thought it may be worthwhile to share my opinion of her. Please be aware beforehand that this is strictly my OPINION, and yours may be vastly different than mine, and whether or not a ship is worth earning is ultimately a decision one must make for him or herself. So, is she a good ship? In my opinion she is a great ship! I really enjoy her as a whole. She's like a slightly slower Montana with bigger guns in fast turning turrets. She has a great secondary armament "if you build for it." She has awesome AA, good dispersion on the 457s, heals with fast recharges, and is on the tried and true Montana hull that, when angled, is quite tanky and absorbs damage quite well. Now if you were hoping for a "borderline OP" ship like a Stalingrad, or "blatantly OP" ship like Smolensk, then you may be disappointed as, while very strong, she is very much "balanced" in every sense of the word. There are instances where she will outshine other BBs at her tier. However, in just as many cases, the opposite will be true. I began having better results with her when I quit using my 19 point Montana captain and took a 17 point captain out of the NC and retrained him with secondary's in mind. While still not an all out brawler like the GK, Ohio does lend herself to a little bit more aggressive gameplay as she doesn't perform long range gunnery duties quite as well as her tech tree sister "due to having fewer guns. " In closing, I think Ohio is a great ship, and Im happy that I have her in my port. Again though, whether or not she is worth the work, (or money,) is up to the individual to decide. I will post some photos below to show my current captain skills, as well as the modules I chose.
  2. What defines a "Veteran Player?" Really though, what does? I am still wondering how WG see's the pre-requisite of "5 Tier X Ships" a fair and acceptable entry point for this new activity. When in reality... it couldn't be further from it. Lots of players don't have multiple tier X ships or even ANY tier X ships that have been playing this game for years. Why are they excluded from this? In my case, I have only two tier X ships. République & Henry IV. I am a HUGE french navy ship fan and enjoy the speedy play-style they allow me to have. I will be getting the Italian cruisers when they embark because they have a very niche play-style.. "big gun that go boom and is invisible ( full speed smoke )" If WG was to not change it any-time in the future, then I would be up to 3 lines ( having the Italian cruisers researched ). Still unable to reset a branch. In order for me to partake in this, I have to get 3 other lines ( or 2 if the Italian cruisers come out before any changes are made ) that I simply have no interest in playing whatsoever, to then be eligible to play? No, that's wrong. The requirement should be removed in it's entirety or reverted to what was initially announced by Kami, "who has at least two tier X re-searchable ships in port" I can't be the only one here who is in the same boat as me. Lots of players are excluded from this because "veteran players" are classified as holders of many tier X ships when it shouldn't be that way. I guess I have been playing the game all wrong if I don't have several tier X ships? Also Lets be honest.. the Research Bureau is a cash cow.You don't have to be a genius to see why. You only have to peak your nose into the premium shop right now. TODAY ( August 21 2019 ) the new update which rolled out RB also landed a few new premium shop goodies for purchase. All these "support" bundles to help ease the players for regrinding. However... I could of sworn/heard I read somewhere that you wanted players to remember the earlier experiences in the game". Found it. here is a link to that video. Start the video at 3:00 and listen away. Now if WG wanted players to take their time through this and remember those earlier experiences/ with the grind, why would they bring out these bundles to help move them quicker to the higher tiers again? They don't. They know the majority of the lower tier ships are very unplayable in stock configuration. They know very well you don't want to play those. If they wanted to make you play those, they could simply put some earn-able research bureau tokens on the lower tier ships... but instead they keep it at 6 and above only. I am not outraged that this entire activity is a cash cow... but WG playing it off as some sort of " enjoy the old times and earn something new" is really far-fetched. I don't expect WG to come out and blatantly mention this is a cash grab.. but from the responses on the YT videos on how they explained how it works and the goals are... the majority of players don't want it. They can get more players to partake in this by simply reverting the requirement or removing it in its entirety. Why would it be a bad thing? It wouldn't be. ( for their pockets ) I know I am probably going to get flamed, and that's fine. I am a grown man. I can take feedback. I just feel after 3 years of playing this game, loving this game, supporting this game by purchasing premium ships/ time, doubloons, camo.. you name it... I feel jaded that I am left out. This is how I feel. I was so excited initially with the NTC. I wasn't keen on the rewards they were offering at the time, but the concept of it I was 100% on board with. Jimbob.
  3. admiralsexybeast

    About The NTC Reward Ships

    So, I must admit that I don't really keep up with WOWs news all that well. Basically, my understanding of the NTC is that we can choose to erase progress on a number of tech trees we've already finished and in return for regrinding them, we can get rewards, of which tier 10 premium BB USS Ohio is my main focus. My question is; if I so desired, would I be able to just re-research the tech trees I erase with my free xp and still be able to get the reward ship? I really don't see why I wouldn't be able to because that means I still technically redid the required amount of tech trees, but Im not sure if it works that way? I guess I'm just at the point now where I'm getting bored with the Tier 10 BBs that I have and am willing to throw some money at the game to get something new right away. I just want a new Tier 10 BB that is going to give me good, consistent gun performance "which is why I've been waiting patiently for over a month now for the Slava to be released," but I guess that's not happening anytime soon. Also, I figure this way, I could enjoy playing something that's not common for a little bit before I start seeing several Ohio's per team per battle.
×