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

Proposed Consumable: Sabotage

302 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Members
3,043 posts
10,248 battles
3 minutes ago, Big_Spud said:

Someone makes a bad joke and then gets mad and defends it as being satire, because its a really really bad and obviously salt filled joke.

Thus, the separation of irritated tryhards from the true satirists is made... :Smile_trollface:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,043 posts
10,248 battles
1 minute ago, KiyoSenkan said:

That'd be true if I was ever mad about anything in this thread.

Sounds more like you got mad about it, realized it was a joke, and are now projecting to try and look like the bigger man so you don't feel foolish.

It's okay, dude. Learn to laugh at yourself.

Physician, heal thyself. :Smile_trollface:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,877
[NSF]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
5,300 posts
9,116 battles
9 minutes ago, Goodwood_Alpha said:

Thus, the separation of irritated tryhards from the true satirists is made... :Smile_trollface:

Yeah basically.

 

Protip, just calling something satire doesn't excuse it being bad and unfunny, or from being called as such.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,551
[SBS]
Members
5,194 posts
Just now, LittleWhiteMouse said:

There's the same number of cruiser slots in a given match as ever.  The only thing that may have changed is that there are less battleships being played currently with the cruiser release.

Are you suggesting there wasn't a massive increase in the amount of radar ships per match over the last two months?  Of course you're not, because we all saw it happen.  Things are normalizing but I'd be willing to bet the net result will be more radar per match than before the US CL release.  There is, or will soon be seven new radar cruisers added to the game in a relatively short period of time.  That will have an impact on the meta for some time.  

43 minutes ago, Slimeball91 said:

This one isn't satire, go ahead and mull it over and let me know what you think.  Keep in mind we have the BB overpopulation problem that needs reeled in so there is a real need for something like this. 

I find it interesting that no one is willing to address my idea.  No one will because you know you'll only look like a hypocrite when you try to shoot it down.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,845
[NMKJT]
Beta Testers
24,800 posts
3,895 battles
2 minutes ago, Big_Spud said:

Protip, just calling something satire doesn't excuse it being bad and unfunny, or from being called as such.

And only a vocal minority including yourself thinks it's bad and unfunny, so... Yeah.

 

I think that says more about you than you think.

Edited by KiyoSenkan
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,551
[SBS]
Members
5,194 posts
Just now, Big_Spud said:

Protip, just calling something satire doesn't excuse it being bad and unfunny, or from being called as such.

The point is the joke is on you.  When you find the OP's idea bad or unfunny its because you know you look like a fool when you object.

Just now, KiyoSenkan said:

And only a vocal minority including yourself thinks it's bad and unfunny, so... Yeah.

I think that says more about you than you think.

Ha, you posted this why I was typing my reply.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,043 posts
10,248 battles
Just now, KiyoSenkan said:

And only a vocal minority including yourself thinks it's bad and unfunny, so... Yeah.

I think that says more about you than you think.

So now you're claiming to be a mind-reader in addition to your constant attempts at psychological projection?

Gaaah, we gots us another aidspig on the loose!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,877
[NSF]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
5,300 posts
9,116 battles
6 minutes ago, KiyoSenkan said:

And only a vocal minority including yourself thinks it's bad and unfunny, so... Yeah.

 

I think that says more about you than you think.

 

"""""""Vocal Minority"""""""

 

Also interesting, I thought you said you had blocked me multiple times over disagreeing with you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,845
[NMKJT]
Beta Testers
24,800 posts
3,895 battles
7 minutes ago, Goodwood_Alpha said:

So now you're claiming to be a mind-reader in addition to your constant attempts at psychological projection?

I ain't a mind reader, he's just extremely predictable.

 

EDIT: Look at him, getting all offended that someone noticed he hasn't changed one bit in half a year. And his favorite line was that I'm easily triggered.

Edited by KiyoSenkan
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,877
[NSF]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
5,300 posts
9,116 battles
44 minutes ago, KiyoSenkan said:

I ain't a mind reader, he's just extremely predictable.

I have literally replied to you once in the past, what?

Four months?

 

Do you have a problem I need to know about?

 

Quote

EDIT: Look at him, getting all offended that someone noticed he hasn't changed one bit in half a year. And his favorite line was that I'm easily triggered.

Are you obsessed with me?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
328
Beta Testers
832 posts
10,391 battles
2 hours ago, renegadestatuz said:

This to me doesn’t seem like something that’ll allow for skilled plays to take place. This seems more like something to make no skill required plays to take place to allow a dd to easily land torps without having to actually think.

It’s essentially an “I’m gonna land these torps no matter what and there’s nothing they can do about it” consumable. How is anything about that skilled?

Kinda like radar for cruisers huh?

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,415
[WOLF9]
Privateers
12,597 posts
4,602 battles

This "idea" is so bad I'm not even going to waste a Downbote.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36,287
[WG-CC]
WoWS Community Contributors
11,770 posts
9,605 battles
19 minutes ago, Slimeball91 said:

Are you suggesting there wasn't a massive increase in the amount of radar ships per match over the last two months?  Of course you're not, because we all saw it happen.  Things are normalizing but I'd be willing to bet the net result will be more radar per match than before the US CL release.  There is, or will soon be seven new radar cruisers added to the game in a relatively short period of time.  That will have an impact on the meta for some time.  

I find it interesting that no one is willing to address my idea.  No one will because you know you'll only look like a hypocrite when you try to shoot it down.  

There is -- because the United States cruiser release is still going on and everyone's having fun unlocking their Cockbote.  Well, once they get past Seattle anyway.  On top of that, Indianapolis was just given away.  So this is a transient, not a permanent issue.  There are more cruisers and less battleships being played.  That's it.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,251 posts
4,322 battles
17 minutes ago, LittleWhiteMouse said:

There is -- because the United States cruiser release is still going on and everyone's having fun unlocking their Cockbote.  Well, once they get past Seattle anyway.  On top of that, Indianapolis was just given away.  So this is a transient, not a permanent issue.  There are more cruisers and less battleships being played.  That's it.

But we should nerf radar now that we have seen it at it's worse. That way when things calm down radar will still be nerfed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36,287
[WG-CC]
WoWS Community Contributors
11,770 posts
9,605 battles
Just now, StoneRhino said:

But we should nerf radar now that we have seen it at it's worse. That way when things calm down radar will still be nerfed.

That's like arguing torpedoes should be nerfed immediately after the Japanese destroyer line got revamped.  It's reactionary and nonsensical.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,251 posts
4,322 battles
Just now, LittleWhiteMouse said:

That's like arguing torpedoes should be nerfed immediately after the Japanese destroyer line got revamped.  It's reactionary and nonsensical.

That was kind of the point.

Is the current meta unfair to DDs and CVs because of the uptick in cruisers? Sure.

But it will calm down and we should wait to see how things normalize before an honest discussion can take place.

But there is a 185 page thread as of right now. Which inspired this thread because there are players that just want radar nerfed and are using the current inflated cruisers numbers as a strawman to prove their point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,845
[NMKJT]
Beta Testers
24,800 posts
3,895 battles
40 minutes ago, LittleWhiteMouse said:

That's like arguing torpedoes should be nerfed immediately after the Japanese destroyer line got revamped.  It's reactionary and nonsensical.

But one happened and the other gets stiff resistance. Hmmm...

 

One side is told to git gud/adapt/learn to play even when they already have, and the other side gets all kinds of excuses like how it'd be too hard and unfair to change. Hmmm....

 

The purpose of the satire used in this thread is to highlight the hypocrisy evident in this forum. And it's done that beautifully. I'm just surprised that group included you.

Edited by KiyoSenkan
  • Cool 2
  • Meh 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
373
[P2W]
[P2W]
Members
1,241 posts
4 hours ago, renegadestatuz said:

This to me doesn’t seem like something that’ll allow for skilled plays to take place. This seems more like something to make no skill required plays to take place to allow a dd to easily land torps without having to actually think.

It’s essentially an “I’m gonna land these torps no matter what and there’s nothing they can do about it” consumable. How is anything about that skilled?

Where's the skill in radar? I'd say it's the same thing, but radar is worse because at least a BB still has a torpedo belt if it can't steer or stop.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
3,420 posts
6,278 battles
38 minutes ago, StoneRhino said:

That was kind of the point.

Is the current meta unfair to DDs and CVs because of the uptick in cruisers? Sure.

But it will calm down and we should wait to see how things normalize before an honest discussion can take place.

But there is a 185 page thread as of right now. Which inspired this thread because there are players that just want radar nerfed and are using the current inflated cruisers numbers as a strawman to prove their point.

lol 185 pages of bad DD players..........ummmmmm that salt tastes good.

  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36,287
[WG-CC]
WoWS Community Contributors
11,770 posts
9,605 battles
4 minutes ago, KiyoSenkan said:

But one happened and the other gets stiff resistance. Hmmm... 

Do you even know when and why the torpedo nerf happened?  Like, really?  Are you aware of how long ago it was and how long it's been that way and for what reason?  It was patch 0.5.5 back in May of 2016 to combat the still rampant torpedo-soup problem.  This is after Soviet and American cruisers had already received radar.

Changed the parameters of the Type 93 model 1 and model 3 torpedoes mounted on destroyers Kagero and Shimakaze. As a partial solution to the 'torpedo soup' problem, we increased the spotting range of Type 93 model 1 and model 3 torpedoes 2.5km and 1.9km, respectively. The range of Type 93 model 3 torpedoes has been reduced from 15km to 12km, and the speed of the model 1 torpedoes was reduced from 67kts to 62kts. We want to make it easier for all players to avoid being hit by randomly launched long-range torpedoes.

Since this patch, the Type 93 Mod 3s had their detection buffed down to 1.7km (200m) or a 1.1s reduction on reaction time for a stationary target. 
Surveillance Radar has been nerfed back in patch 0.7.6, so neither are untouched.

20 minutes ago, KiyoSenkan said:

One side is told to git gud/adapt/learn to play even when they already have, and the other side gets all kinds of excuses like how it'd be too hard and unfair to change. Hmmm....

Both sides are told to "git gud".  Look at any cruiser thread where someone whines about getting delorted by battleships.

21 minutes ago, KiyoSenkan said:

The purpose of the satire used in this thread is to highlight the hypocrisy evident in this forum. And it's done that beautifully. I'm just surprised that group included you.

I like my satire with scathing wit.  This is just whining with a different coat of paint.  I have very little patience for any attempts at division and tribalism within this community -- particularly when it's intended to be combative instead of supportive.

  • Cool 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
393
[ICBM]
Members
673 posts
7,919 battles

My issue with the proposed consumable is that there is no clear mechanism of action. Are we to believe that saboteurs aboard the DD somehow get onto the targeted BB and take out engines/steering gears? That bends suspension of disbelief to the breaking point. Yeah, it's a video game and there is plenty of make-believe, but this takes it a little too far for me. 

I'd vote for a radar-jammer consumable first before this, but I think that also could get a little nutty. 

Just hoping radar-itis thins out here in the forseeable future. 

ETA: nvm. Just saw that the whole thing was a joke. Okay, you got me. lol.

Edited by mrieder79

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,043 posts
10,248 battles
1 hour ago, LittleWhiteMouse said:

I like my satire with scathing wit.  This is just whining with a different coat of paint.

If you wouldn't mind, I have A Modest Proposal to make...

Spoiler

...it involves destroyers of certain nations eating copious amounts of poi~:Smile_trollface:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,237
[WG-CC]
Privateers, Members
9,038 posts
7,952 battles
15 hours ago, Velled said:

Kinda like radar for cruisers huh?

Not really, I explained on Page 2 why Radar and this sabotage are not comparable skills. To give you a TL;DR: A Destroyer getting sabotaged has two options which will help it reducing or preventing the damage it‘ll take. A Battleship getting sabotaged has no such luxury.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,321
[WOLFB]
Members
3,371 posts
14,009 battles

Disabling HUD while the consummable is active would be spiccy. You still get that idea of sabotage, you still get a somewhat decent consummable while not making it OP. 

 

Honestly, if you want to strike a "blind" target, that's just really good. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×