Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
Spud_butt

i get it, i get it......

16 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

2,889
[JMMAF]
Members
1,954 posts
6,629 battles

after serving my much deserved 7 day (thing not to be discussed), I was hesitant to start playing again. but I sucked it up, and entered battle....

as I was fully expecting the worst WG can deliver for both MM, and RNG, was mildly surprised to find battle results about average. with slightly less damage, a few less ships sunk, survival about the same, MBH % almost identical, and almost the same number of TKers and AFKers as pre-(that which shall not be discussed) on the green team. 

up until this afternoon, was only experiencing about a 30% reduction in win rate. yesterday, for instance, played 8 battles, and won one, which is not all that far off from the worst days I've experienced in the last 4k battles, and it is a weekend.

today, I played a couple battles in kamikaze.

1st battle, passing thru smoke, boosted, undetected, not been detected for almost a minute, WASDing, not firing. no planes about to detect me, aoba sunk me with full salvo, most hits, from 13k + well, ok, it happens.

2nd battle, 2 red corgi capts (cleves), so you can pretty much figure out the outcome of that slaughter loss. cool thing was, it didn't take long.

3rd battle, red corgi capt, so you can pretty much figure out the outcome of that slaughter loss. cool thing was, it was even faster than the 2nd.

4th battle, got into a solo knife fight with a Farragut, and the 2 red CAs that were supporting him. I, of course, had no support, because I was on the green team. tried to ram, as the CAs were whittling my HP down fast, missed, but stayed close so they could not shoot me. torps reloaded. fired off full salvo, as did he, one (1) of his torps hit 1st, of course I was sunk. all 6 of my torps hit, and all 6 caused flooding. for 7960 damage, and did not sink him.

well, WG, either the 7 day (thing not to be discussed) was adequate punishment, or it isn't. if the 7 days (thing not to be discussed) was only part of part of the punishment schedule, please inform me as to how long this stupid [edited]crapis going to continue. there is no way to read this sort of battle result as anything but an attempt to get me to quit the game, or display just how badly broken the game is. which is it? if you respond it's working as intended, then it's obvious you do not consider the 7 day (thing not to be discussed) adequate.

 

shot-18_02.17_15_00.38-0119.thumb.jpg.ee605dee4f013d9346ebea70db917fe6.jpg

Edited by not_acceptable
  • Boring 2
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,770
[SALVO]
Members
24,198 posts
24,546 battles
16 minutes ago, not_acceptable said:

 

today, I played a couple battles in kamikaze.

1st battle, passing thru smoke, boosted, undetected, not been detected for almost a minute, WASDing, not firing. no planes about to detect me, aoba sunk me with full salvo, most hits, from 13k + well, ok, it happens.

 

What?  You weren't detected by anyone and you got hit at by an Aoba from 13km away and killed?  Did you sail to close to a friendly ship that was the real target and the shells just plain missed "onto" you?  

Jeeez.  Did you commit a blasphemy against RNGesus or something?  :Smile_hiding:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
253
[FG]
Members
566 posts
4,728 battles

If all your torps hit the same spot on the enemy Farragut (like the bow for example) then damage saturation would have kicked in after the first torp hit, assuming it was not already saturated somewhat beforehand. 

I've hit an enemy Farragut on low health before with a torp and dealt 54 damage to him. He only died due to the instant flooding tick from the torp. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,217
[A-D-F]
[A-D-F]
Members
2,142 posts
57 minutes ago, not_acceptable said:

after serving my much deserved 7 day (thing not to be discussed), I was hesitant to start playing again. but I sucked it up, and entered battle....

as I was fully expecting the worst WG can deliver for both MM, and RNG, was mildly surprised to find battle results about average. with slightly less damage, a few less ships sunk, survival about the same, MBH % almost identical, and almost the same number of TKers and AFKers as pre-ban on the green team. 

up until this afternoon, was only experiencing about a 30% reduction in win rate. yesterday, for instance, played 8 battles, and won one, which is not all that far off from the worst days I've experienced in the last 4k battles, and it is a weekend.

today, I played a couple battles in kamikaze.

1st battle, passing thru smoke, boosted, undetected, not been detected for almost a minute, WASDing, not firing. no planes about to detect me, aoba sunk me with full salvo, most hits, from 13k + well, ok, it happens.

2nd battle, 2 red corgi capts (cleves), so you can pretty much figure out the outcome of that slaughter loss. cool thing was, it didn't take long.

3rd battle, red corgi capt, so you can pretty much figure out the outcome of that slaughter loss. cool thing was, it was even faster than the 2nd.

4th battle, got into a solo knife fight with a Farragut, and the 2 red CAs that were supporting him. I, of course, had no support, because I was on the green team. tried to ram, as the CAs were whittling my HP down fast, missed, but stayed close so they could not shoot me. torps reloaded. fired off full salvo, as did he, one (1) of his torps hit 1st, of course I was sunk. all 6 of my torps hit, and all 6 caused flooding. for 7960 damage, and did not sink him.

well, WG, either the 7 day (thing not to be discussed) was adequate punishment, or it isn't. if the 7 days (thing not to be discussed) was only part of part of the punishment schedule, please inform me as to how long this stupid [edited]crapis going to continue. there is no way to read this sort of battle result as anything but an attempt to get me to quit the game, or display just how badly broken the game is. which is it? if you respond it's working as intended, then it's obvious you do not consider the 7 day (thing not to be discussed) adequate.

 

shot-18_02.17_15_00.38-0119.thumb.jpg.ee605dee4f013d9346ebea70db917fe6.jpg

You have actually seen a red corgi? I have seen two, both on my team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,639
Members
9,915 posts
13,288 battles

for something not to be discussed  you sure as [edited] are discussing it a lot here.... you might get a few more days if you are not carefull

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,600
[FML]
Members
3,656 posts
14,584 battles
1 hour ago, not_acceptable said:

after serving my much deserved 7 day (thing not to be discussed), I was hesitant to start playing again. but I sucked it up, and entered battle....

as I was fully expecting the worst WG can deliver for both MM, and RNG, was mildly surprised to find battle results about average. with slightly less damage, a few less ships sunk, survival about the same, MBH % almost identical, and almost the same number of TKers and AFKers as pre-ban on the green team. 

up until this afternoon, was only experiencing about a 30% reduction in win rate. yesterday, for instance, played 8 battles, and won one, which is not all that far off from the worst days I've experienced in the last 4k battles, and it is a weekend.

today, I played a couple battles in kamikaze.

1st battle, passing thru smoke, boosted, undetected, not been detected for almost a minute, WASDing, not firing. no planes about to detect me, aoba sunk me with full salvo, most hits, from 13k + well, ok, it happens.

2nd battle, 2 red corgi capts (cleves), so you can pretty much figure out the outcome of that slaughter loss. cool thing was, it didn't take long.

3rd battle, red corgi capt, so you can pretty much figure out the outcome of that slaughter loss. cool thing was, it was even faster than the 2nd.

4th battle, got into a solo knife fight with a Farragut, and the 2 red CAs that were supporting him. I, of course, had no support, because I was on the green team. tried to ram, as the CAs were whittling my HP down fast, missed, but stayed close so they could not shoot me. torps reloaded. fired off full salvo, as did he, one (1) of his torps hit 1st, of course I was sunk. all 6 of my torps hit, and all 6 caused flooding. for 7960 damage, and did not sink him.

well, WG, either the 7 day (thing not to be discussed) was adequate punishment, or it isn't. if the 7 days (thing not to be discussed) was only part of part of the punishment schedule, please inform me as to how long this stupid [edited]crapis going to continue. there is no way to read this sort of battle result as anything but an attempt to get me to quit the game, or display just how badly broken the game is. which is it? if you respond it's working as intended, then it's obvious you do not consider the 7 day (thing not to be discussed) adequate.

 

shot-18_02.17_15_00.38-0119.thumb.jpg.ee605dee4f013d9346ebea70db917fe6.jpg

Make sure your tin foil hat doesn’t chafe your head. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
114
[ADAPT]
Members
938 posts
16,048 battles

still not losing 10 in row like me..but keep trying..i know someone in here lose 15 in row...well, some day are just not for you..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,889
[JMMAF]
Members
1,954 posts
6,629 battles
Just now, Flashtirade said:

Post replays, word of mouth alone isn't enough to sway skepticism

and if I did, you would be telling me to post screenshots.... which I did. it shows there's was 6 torp hits, 6 floodings and zero kills. 

I am skeptical at best when people play the foil hat, small sample size, prove what you are saying and post replays or screenshots. fix that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,889
[JMMAF]
Members
1,954 posts
6,629 battles
2 minutes ago, not_acceptable said:

and if I did, you would be telling me to post screenshots.... which I did. it shows there's was 6 torp hits, 6 floodings and zero kills. 

I am skeptical at best when people play the foil hat card, or small sample size, prove what you are saying and post replays or screenshots. fix that

shot-18_02.17_15.01_02-0178.thumb.jpg.93a3b898e061af9e413dd888198a0bfa.jpg

Edited by not_acceptable
tired of reading retrolls stupid posts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
441
[K0]
Members
1,754 posts
7,870 battles
1 minute ago, not_acceptable said:

and if I did, you would be telling me to post screenshots.... which I did. it shows there's was 6 torp hits, 6 floodings and zero kills. 

I am skeptical at best when people play the foil hat, small sample size, prove what you are saying and post replays or screenshots. fix that.

 

6 minutes ago, not_acceptable said:

shot-18_02.17_15.01_02-0178.thumb.jpg.93a3b898e061af9e413dd888198a0bfa.jpg

Your screenshot proves is that you hit the Farragut in either the bow or stern with all 6 torpedoes, resulting in damage saturation.

As for your text about the 4th game, you received a torp hit in the midsection (where I think it's impossible to reach damage saturation with torpedo hits due to how health is distributed) or you were so low on health due to enemy shellfire that saturation wouldn't have saved you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,639
Members
9,915 posts
13,288 battles
8 hours ago, not_acceptable said:

close to a friendly ship... that is [edited]funny. the kamikaze can hardly keep up with most T7 ships MM gleefully provides, and when they turn away and start running while I am attempting to detect, spot, or cap, there are no friendly ships close. damn, dude, do you play random battles, I can't be the only one this is happening to?

I think you may want to remove all the stupid that lives in your head, and reinstall the brain you misplaced somewhere, at some point.

no, I've have not actually seen them in battle, they spawned on the opposite side of the map. I just read the team results, and see the alerts in battle chat. 

I can't be discussing it as i'm not naming it, so it will take a bit of a stretch for them to apply yet another (that which is not to be discussed). it's way more fun to not discuss it here in the forum than to get my [edited]kicked all over every map I've been on lately.

this is also a [edited]stupid, moron level post. if you can't do better, just shut the [edited] up.

I was asking, as there is no way in hell I want to be spending any more of my time trying to figure out what WG is doing, or not doing, in this game. you read and post a lot in this forum, have you seen much of a tendency for WG to provide data, or directly answer questions about gameplay, balance, MM or RNG (or anything else) on a regular basis? uh, no.

 

I was hoping somebody would suggest this, thank you. 6 torps, 6 flooding the 6 floodings were 150 HP each, ~ so that is ~ 900 damage. this means each torp was doing about 1400 average damage.... to a T6 DD. they are fired in sets of 2 from the kamikaze, in order for all 6 to hit, there would have had to be at least 2 areas of impact, because even at close spread, at 1 km, those torps are not running all that close together, and the DDs are not 700 ft long, not even the farragut. I can't think of any time 2 torp hits has failed to sink even a full HP DD. nobody else was shooting at that Farragut, much less hitting it where a torp would hit it,

so even if the rest were doing no damage, the damage saturation thing just doesn't subtract up. 

 

I have less than 1/2 the # of battles you do. if I survive long enuff to catch up, I will probably find ways to regularly lose 10 in a row. what is your favorite ship for long strings of losses? I generally stop playing any IJN DD after 5 or 6 losses, which has a tendency to shorten the strings. possibly this has something to do with it? but one of the reasons I like playing IJN DDs is I don't feel compelled to use the guns much, as the turret traverse rate is so slow I end up steering the ship to aim the guns, which never seems to work out well for me. also, because the detection range on the torps is so long, even the biggest and dumbest of the BBs can easily dodge unless i'm so close they don't arm, and then it doesn't matter anyway. maybe i'm overthinking this whole thing. well, somebody has to, obviously WG isn't.

maybe it is the foil hat(s) the retrolls are talking about.

wouldn't know, are you using a lot while playing? do you feel you are addicted, or self medicating in a effort to get off the prescription meds?

cb9OrAp.jpg

 

FULL of insults and name calling (AS USUAL) so I would put the odds at 2:1 you get a much DESERVED and needed vacation... and I would LOVE it to be named after that famous Bands Album..... you know the one....\

Maybe if you spent LESS time insulting people and name calling and more time playing you might have better luck getting better at being better at the game....
I wish you the best but this post is full of   crap   [edited]name calling, insults, and rule breaking   crap.... you should be banned FIVEEVER for this crap

Edited by pmgaudio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
260 posts
4,070 battles

Wargaming is a business.

The amount of money and effort it would take to program countless subtle ways to "mess with" players they don't like is far greater than the absolutely 0 return in money they would get on that investment.

We all have terrible days, bans or no bans. Sometimes, you figure out a mistake you made, adapt, and go on. Other days, RNG hates you, and you just log out and play again some other day. No conspiracy needed, and I grow very tired of how in our culture these days too many people jump to "conspiracies" to explain everything vs. common sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×