Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
Sledgehammer427

Sledge's Weekly Ground Gear

17 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

516
[BUN]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
2,534 posts
4,294 battles

First off, I wonder what the etymology behind "grinding ones gears" is. Is it the actual grinding of ones gears, caused by poor use of ones personal transmission (which, nobody should have that much control over in the first place besides you) or is it the sound of gears grinding that is the source of the term. Since, to anyone who grew up driving standard, the sound of someone botching a shift is like fingernails on a chalkboard. A morsel of food for thought, I suppose.

I like to think that for the most part, I have no qualms about this game and it's playerbase. I enjoy playing it. I've been here for a long time andthe people that play this game with me are nowhere near as awful as some of the other games I've played (like all the salt that gets thrown at you if you aren't playing Rainbow 6 Siege on an SSD because you take a year and a half to load in) 
But there is one thing that I have a gripe about. Its a small thing. I swear. 

I sincerely dislike all the hate and rancor thrown at Russian/Soviet units and claims of "Russian Bias" thrown at said units. The Gremyaschy and the Nikolai are both ships that were released in an overpowered state, and since then the developers basically folded in a whole new branch of supertesters and contributors who are actively listened to (YMMV on this, but I'd like to think we can all agree it was worse before) and statistics gathered before a ship even approaches release. Some folks are so quick to jump on and harangue Russian Ships being released they don't even research the ship they are riffing on. 
(One time on facebook, on the Molotov's release announcement, someone called it an overpowered blueprint ship. It was really fun explaining the Project 26bis design which was an improved Kirov Class. Nobody ever listens) 
Why is the general western playerbase so quick to turn down any Russian line in anything? Why are blueprint ships such a problem when its Russian, and not when its anything else? 
Of the French Battleship line, excluding premiums, only 3 were ever built in real steel. Nobody moans about them. Not a soul as far as I can tell. Nobody complains about the tier 5 Nicholas, or the tier 4 Phoenix, or any of the blueprint American Cruisers. Or the Montana, which was never built. The Roon and Hindenburg didn't even exist in blueprint form AFAIK. The GK, or the Izumo or even the new Azuma in testing never had a pound of steel devoted to them in the builder's yard.
People get so upset over a Russian branch in development. Why? 
Categorically, the Russian lines have all been ease-of-use types. Russian Cruisers are fast, can relax at range, and lob high-velocity shells at whatever they can see. They have garbage concealment and can't turn worth a snowballs chances in a furnace. Sounds pretty balanced to me. They can't get in and contest much until late game where if they survive, its because of the operator's skill more than the ship in question being OP.
Russian Destroyers have crap torpedoes, decent gun range, high speed and high velocity, but are more cumbersome and larger in size than their competition. The Khaba was ridiculous on launch. I'll give the community that. I didn't get it until the eve of the nerfs she got and with the introduction of the Harugumo, shes been soundly beat in terms of a harasser. Shes now no more than a long range annoyance than the game changer she was. The playerbase rejoiced, perhaps, rightfully so.   
I've already gone over my thoughts on the Soviet BB line. I don't see any blatantly overpowered ships anywhere. Nothing that hasn't been done better with any other line. Thats a general overview of the line from just looking at them. A lot remains to be seen under the hood with the soft stats of the ships yet to be announced. People may be freaking out over nothing. Most of the time they are.
I have been studying military history in various forms for getting on 20 years. I've always enjoyed looking beyond the celebrated types and looking more into the unknowns, the untested-s, the underdogs and the underdeveloped. It's why I have a passion for the Russian ships in this game. They look so cool to me and have an interesting idealogy behind their design choices. 

Why can't we, as a playerbase, look forward to these things and let things move along before we start throwing "bias" and "Bull**** Paper Blueprint garbage" out into the world and develop opinions based on the facts we know instead of jumping to conclusions like its an Olympic sport? 
Call me an apologist, call me a Russiaboo, call me your worst if you want. I'm tired of people disparaging an entire tech tree because of the flag it flies while letting other trees get away with similar or worse.

-Sledge

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,207
[WOLF7]
Members
12,289 posts

Past debacles from WG should all be ignored? :Smile_popcorn:

I would really like to see your rose colored glasses, they must be extra stronk....:Smile_teethhappy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
516
[BUN]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
2,534 posts
4,294 battles
6 minutes ago, awiggin said:

Past debacles from WG should all be ignored?

Perhaps its because I like to see the good in things and people first. I think that anything and everything is subject to change. I'm looking at the game and the ships in it and setting aside marketing and publishing debacles in the past. 
 

8 minutes ago, awiggin said:

I would really like to see your rose colored glasses, they must be extra stronk....

I understand the purpose of cynicism in the modern environment, I have my moments too. But this is still a video game at the end of the day, nothing has a consequence in the real world unless you let it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,069
[HYDRO]
Members
3,679 posts
5,280 battles

A big reason behind the dislike on VMF ships has to do with history and how WG is presenting it. Saying and arguing that the Russian navy had as big a naval contribution in the war as other allied powers is plain silly. Of course, the WWII Russian navy was pretty brave, put up a reasonable fight and is worthy of respect, but nothing at the level it is presented. In the context of selling a product to their biggest playerbase it makes total sense obviously.

Then there are some of the ships too. For example Kutuzov, a Cold War 50s-60s design is pitted against WWII enemies. Or Neustrashimyy, an upcoming Tier IX DD is just a tiny step before the first missile destroyers showed up. People simply consider it unfair for such ships to face that much older ones. Obviously most like to forget Tashkent being a 1938 design but I digress.

Stalingrad has mostly to do with it being steel locked and barred from most players that garners dislike.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,207
[WOLF7]
Members
12,289 posts
6 minutes ago, Sledgehammer427 said:

Perhaps its because I like to see the good in things and people first. I think that anything and everything is subject to change. I'm looking at the game and the ships in it and setting aside marketing and publishing debacles in the past. 
 

I understand the purpose of cynicism in the modern environment, I have my moments too. But this is still a video game at the end of the day, nothing has a consequence in the real world unless you let it.

Look, I'm sorry you wasted a ton of money on this game, and if you're happy with everything, great.

And it's a business that should cater to all it's customers, and maybe invest in a game that people find fun and engaging, rather than investing far too much in spitting out shiny objects to milk the whales with. :Smile_trollface:

WG pushes changes without any real idea of how it will change the game meta as a whole, they've been doing it for years, and apparently intend to continue.

I guess we'll just have to wait and see.:Smile_trollface:

Edited by awiggin
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
516
[BUN]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
2,534 posts
4,294 battles
9 minutes ago, warheart1992 said:

A big reason behind the dislike on VMF ships has to do with history and how WG is presenting it. Saying and arguing that the Russian navy had as big a naval contribution in the war as other allied powers is plain silly.

I don't see that presentation at all though. They're just ships, with nothing insinuated about their service or their might whatsoever. I try not to read between the lines though, maybe there's something I missed. 

10 minutes ago, warheart1992 said:

Then there are some of the ships too. For example Kutuzov, a Cold War 50s-60s design is pitted against WWII enemies.

100mm of 1950s armor is no harder to penetrate than 1930s armor. While the Sverdlov's counter, the Royal Navy's Blackburn Buccaneer, is not in the game, it folds as easily as any other cruiser and has all the same strengths and weaknesses of the other CLs in the game save for smoke and long gun range. 

12 minutes ago, awiggin said:

Look, I'm sorry you wasted a ton of money on this game, and if you'e happy with everything, great.

Waste is a strong word I hesitate to use on what I've spent on this game. I've pulled more enjoyment from my dollars spent here than in any other game I've purchased and played. Even WOT. 

14 minutes ago, awiggin said:

....maybe invest in a game that people find fun and engaging, rather than investing far too much in spitting out shiny objects to milk the whales with.

we as a playerbase brought this on ourselves. We made it very clear we want more content over balancing and improvement. Warships had a bad strategy from the get go because while it fixed a lot of economy issues that drove the WOT playerbase into the ground, we are now clamoring for new endgame content rather than seeing the things we already have improved upon. I'd like to see the development cycle switch to a patch with new content, then the two or three after come with fixes, balances and improvements. As much money as I've spent on this game, I'll admit to whaling out, sure. But I'll still take a fix to certain things over a new shiny they want money for. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,069
[HYDRO]
Members
3,679 posts
5,280 battles
9 minutes ago, Sledgehammer427 said:

I don't see that presentation at all though. They're just ships, with nothing insinuated about their service or their might whatsoever. I try not to read between the lines though, maybe there's something I missed. 

100mm of 1950s armor is no harder to penetrate than 1930s armor. While the Sverdlov's counter, the Royal Navy's Blackburn Buccaneer, is not in the game, it folds as easily as any other cruiser and has all the same strengths and weaknesses of the other CLs in the game save for smoke and long gun range. 

I agree, just pointing out some things the community often uses.

But in the end there are also people sure that Long Lances should be some form of wonderweapon ingame, or how the Bismarck should have 15km+ secondaries cause it's historical.

Bottom line, there's no pleasing some people, so it's easier to blame something else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
516
[BUN]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
2,534 posts
4,294 battles
Just now, warheart1992 said:

I agree, just pointing out some things the community often uses.

But in the end there are also people sure that Long Lances should be some form of wonderweapon ingame, or how the Bismarck should have 15km+ secondaries cause it's historical.

Bottom line, there's no pleasing some people, so it's easier to blame something else.

And I suppose the trouble I'm having is in regards to that last line. It's always the Russians. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,524 posts
10,637 battles

WG has a reputation of adding really overpowered russian units into their games(a few examples):

Imperator Nikolai

IS-3A(WoT)

Gremyachy

IL-40(WoWp)

Defender(WoT)

They have entire lines of tanks in WoT, that if not OP, are much better than other nations tech trees. Their reputation carried over from WoT and WoWp into WoWs, therefore their customers do look more closely at any new russian units from any WG title, and for good reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,935
[WOLF9]
Privateers
11,467 posts
4,550 battles
2 hours ago, Sledgehammer427 said:

I wonder what the etymology behind "grinding ones gears" is.

"Grinding one's gears" has a second implication that seems to have gone missing.  In the early gearboxes there were no synchronizer rings, so moving to an adjacent gear required changing the speed of the input shaft to match the speed of the output shaft at the new gear (the purpose of double-clutching).  If you didn't match correctly, then the gears would clash, making a frightful noise, but more importantly, they wouldn't engage.  So the phrase "to grind one's gears" means both making a possibly-damaging racket, and failing to progress. 

Not sure how that fits with your narrative.

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
516
[BUN]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
2,534 posts
4,294 battles
20 minutes ago, iDuckman said:

So the phrase "to grind one's gears" means both making a possibly-damaging racket, and failing to progress. 

Not sure how that fits with your narrative.

somewhere near introspective, I think :cap_hmm:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,081
[-D-S-]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
2,081 posts
7,978 battles

I think you're right, in that people aren't exactly fair by jumping to said conclusions.  However its the bandwagon effect, and its easy to fall into.  I think that can describe many who express the sentiment of "Russian bias OP ship" stuff.

HOWEVER...

I also believe there's a decent percentage of the community however that also has been logically giving pause to WG and their balance when it comes RU ships.

World of Tanks has plenty of well-established bias, and its popped up here too.  There aren't too many ships that aren't OP or at the very least, insanely strong that are Russian premiums for example.  Krispy Kreme I think is there just to be the token "We don't always make RU premiums OP!" to be brutally honest.

Gremy, Nikolai, Kutuzov, Kron compared to all other T9 cruisers, Stalingrad.. the track record doesn't look good.

 

There is a precedent, and WG feeds into it.  Its not a simple situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
516
[BUN]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
2,534 posts
4,294 battles
33 minutes ago, _Rumple_ said:

WG has a reputation of adding really overpowered russian units into their games(a few examples):

Nikolai is definitely strong but it was much stronger when it was the only tier 4 BB with the armor scheme it has. I think the German kit has pushed it down a notch or two. I rarely take mine out anymore since I will most likely get focused to death (for good reason, I'll add.)
And while the Gremy was much, much stronger long ago, the removal of OWSF hurt the ship greatly and now it doesn't feel like it used to. It feels like a regular old Russian DD to me anymore.  The torps are still nice but...eh. 
Sticking to the topic of this game specifically, I think the mistake was made to try new mechanics and new gimmicks on no-name, who-cares Russian/Soviet ships first. It would serve to boost the playerbase close to home and keep the risk of making something broken that then can't be sold anymore (Missouri comes to mind) that everyone would want. Nobody really cries they missed the Nikolai, until they get brutalized by one. Nobody really cries about missing the Gremy. Everybody cries about missing the Missouri and wants to know when its coming back. That, I think, is where the damage was done. It wasn't a malicious attempt to raze the world with bravado of superior ships and tactics. It was just trying something new without upsetting the large portion of the western playerbase. 
No comment on how well it panned out. Its a reputation thats hard to shake. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
288 posts
8,178 battles

Honestly, I'm not a fan of paper ships. I have a few, but I prefer to collect the historical ships. There aren't many ships at Tier XI and X that actually existed, just Yamato, Shimakaze, Daring, Des Moines, Worcester, Gearing, and YueYang at Tier X. I understand the need for paper ships to balance out the historical ones, but I don't have to play with them if I don't have to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
516
[BUN]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
2,534 posts
4,294 battles
4 minutes ago, CaliburxZero said:

I also believe there's a decent percentage of the community however that also has been logically giving pause to WG and their balance when it comes RU ships.

World of Tanks has plenty of well-established bias, and its popped up here too.  There aren't too many ships that aren't OP or at the very least, insanely strong that are Russian premiums for example.  Krispy Kreme I think is there just to be the token "We don't always make RU premiums OP!" to be brutally honest.

Gremy, Nikolai, Kutuzov, Kron compared to all other T9 cruisers, Stalingrad.. the track record doesn't look good.

 

There is a precedent, and WG feeds into it.  Its not a simple situation.

I agree with this, technically. 
I tend to let Stalingrad slide since its a reward ship to a small portion of the playerbase. Technically, Kronshtadt should be behind a bigger paywall but it takes time to earn her and her gunnery just isn't as good and her armor is meh.

I have wondered on more than one occasion if Makarov, Krasny Krym, and some of the low-tier cruisers are WG trying to cover up how good they made a lot of Russian Premiums. I think though that Molotov is a good demonstration of a Soviet Prem done right. Its the glassiest glass cannon in the history of glass. 

I will agree that its not simple and WG really aren't helping themselves. But at the same time, the playerbase could stand to take a step back and not jump on every little new thing with a hammer and sickle on it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,081
[-D-S-]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
2,081 posts
7,978 battles
1 minute ago, Sledgehammer427 said:

I agree with this, technically. 
I tend to let Stalingrad slide since its a reward ship to a small portion of the playerbase. Technically, Kronshtadt should be behind a bigger paywall but it takes time to earn her and her gunnery just isn't as good and her armor is meh.

I have wondered on more than one occasion if Makarov, Krasny Krym, and some of the low-tier cruisers are WG trying to cover up how good they made a lot of Russian Premiums. I think though that Molotov is a good demonstration of a Soviet Prem done right. Its the glassiest glass cannon in the history of glass. 

I will agree that its not simple and WG really aren't helping themselves. But at the same time, the playerbase could stand to take a step back and not jump on every little new thing with a hammer and sickle on it. 

I completely forgot about Molotov.  I'd say she's probably the only "balanced" premium they own.  Kron should be behind a larger paywall with the current economy (assuming you're not F2P) but that's another bag of worms.  Stalingrad however sets a dangerous precedent and because WG wants to keep people interested via powercreep, this only makes whatever will eventually replace Stalingrad that much stronger and widening the gap even moreso.

The community as a whole especially on these forums will always do the sensationalist response.  Only through very, very careful breakdowns, evidence, and logic will ever get most to listen in what I believe is an echo chamber here.

Its just not worth fighting this battle, my dude.  It will always be an uphill battle if truth doesn't meet what's popular to say on the forums by what is essentially a minority:  "CVs are balanced, Stalingrad is not OP, all BB players are garbage and BBABIES", etc

You have a point, and while I showed you a picture of an SSD as a joke for the T10 BB for the line as a joke, I will simply react to simply the facts and see.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
516
[BUN]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
2,534 posts
4,294 battles
1 minute ago, CaliburxZero said:

The community as a whole especially on these forums will always do the sensationalist response.  Only through very, very careful breakdowns, evidence, and logic will ever get most to listen in what I believe is an echo chamber here.

Chris Crocker got famous for crying about Brittany Spears on the internet. Maybe this is my path to stardom

LEAVE THE RUSSIANS ALONE WAHHHH

XD

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×