Jump to content
You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.
CanadianMonkeys

Thank you for making a joke of your own game

36 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

11
[DRG_N]
Members
6 posts
3,119 battles

Thank you for ruining this game for me like you did with World of Tanks when you made it Mercenaries and added all those fake overpowered tanks.  New we have very arcadish carriers that ruin games.  I can't even have fun in my DD's anymore because I can't stay ahead of my fleet to spot, I just get singled out by planes that can't hit me or get shot down by me.  The game has become unplayable.  Please revert back to the old carrier style, cause otherwise I'm done.  I already quit world of tanks, now I'm going to quit this unless you fix this crap mess you made.

I don't get why company's ruin there own games, are you just tired of working with it?  You could just quit rather then ruining the fun for everyone else.  You know leave and allow people to remember it as the good game it was, or you could just change the whole game and make it not fun so no one plays.  The second option is clearly the choice you made.

You guys might as well call your selves EA now.  Well done, way to ruin your own game.  You gave me 3 free days of prem and I can't even stand playing the game to use it.  What a [edited]waste of time.

  • Cool 7
  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,591
[TBW]
Members
8,296 posts
15,099 battles

The remedy is just don't play random battles any more. I feel your pain though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,914
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
22,178 posts
12,403 battles
28 minutes ago, CanadianMonkeys said:

I can't even have fun in my DD's anymore because I can't stay ahead of my fleet to spot,

Then quit running far ahead of your fleet.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,213
[USCC2]
Members
4,937 posts

@CanadianMonkeys: Ok, I get where you're coming from. WG ensures a specific role for DDs (Spotting and Capping) and make their damage the lowest on average of all ship types.

Spotting and capping means going forward....to scout; and going forward into the kill zone (to cap). Whilst enforcing this 'role' they have introduced Situational Awareness for all, more DDs to kill DDs, hydro, radar and RPF. All the while the DD has stayed at the bottom for damage, survival and after game XP and Credits.

Now I know this game is based on Naval warfare, but in any game if you are expected to scout and keep stealthy usually there won't be as many anti-concealment measures in game (especially when you operate in the kill zone with the lowest HP, lowest gun range, lowest power and torps that fail to hit 90% of the time). If your in the kill zone area where all ships have the range to hit you, in another game you would be better protected - but this is Naval based so the ship at the front has the least armour and the ship at the back has the most :Smile_amazed: lol.

I'm sure if most read the above and imagine someone pitching it as an idea, most would ask if they are taking the P! I play all ship types and would think 'that sounds pretty bad'. :Smile_teethhappy:

16 minutes ago, Sovereigndawg said:

The remedy is just don't play random battles any more. I feel your pain though.

He could indeed, or play lower tiers - but isn't it WG wish for people to not play Co-Op and strive to play the higher tiers. I say let the game play for a little while to see the real impact on game but....

I can't help but think, a mistake has been made. :Smile_honoring:

Edited by _WaveRider_
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,189
[-RNG-]
Supertester
2,780 posts
3,689 battles
28 minutes ago, CanadianMonkeys said:

Please revert back to the old carrier style, cause otherwise I'm done

*Gestures to thin air*

"There is the door kind sir"

 

Old carriers arent coming back. They were broken, just unpopular. The monumental skill gaps turned each game into a 1v1 for which team gets air support, and the team with the air support won a lot more. Mathematically speaking, you could go afk and still achieve a 35% WR at bare minimum, but CV players who truly are not good at what they do can get so low. I have seen even 24%s iirc. I am not saying the rework is good, but it does remove the skill game that such a huge impact on the game. 6 months ago nobody but CV mains would approve of carriers, but now that WG tries something new, everybody goes insane. We demand change, and refute it when it comes. 

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,213
[USCC2]
Members
4,937 posts
4 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

Then quit running far ahead of your fleet.

Yes, he should get in an Asashio and spam torps from behind his CAs where he will have good AA cover. :Smile_facepalm:

Now I know you aren't advocating that, but at least give a fellow player the benefit of the doubt that he has to go forward to spot and that means not always being able to stay uber close to his CAs and benefit from their AA (who, if he does stay back,  will probably be screaming at him (along with the BBs) to push forward! :Smile_teethhappy:).

We do have players that aren't great at certain ship types but when Notser and Flambass think the situation is pretty bad for DDs (along with many others), then I don't think we can always put it down to poor play. :Smile_honoring:

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,213
[USCC2]
Members
4,937 posts
12 minutes ago, _1204_ said:

*Gestures to thin air*

"There is the door kind sir"

 

Old carriers arent coming back. They were broken, just unpopular. The monumental skill gaps turned each game into a 1v1 for which team gets air support, and the team with the air support won a lot more. Mathematically speaking, you could go afk and still achieve a 35% WR at bare minimum, but CV players who truly are not good at what they do can get so low. I have seen even 24%s iirc. I am not saying the rework is good, but it does remove the skill game that such a huge impact on the game. 6 months ago nobody but CV mains would approve of carriers, but now that WG tries something new, everybody goes insane. We demand change, and refute it when it comes. 

No, the old system is gone (although I just wished they had looked at addressing the issues within that game mechanic) and has been replaced with something designed to be more player friendly/enticing.

I think the new system is appealing and probably more fun to most. I also think that the current issues can be fixed - time is just needed to collect data (whatever that data may be). But it isn't going to stop people complaining as it is pretty bad atm lol. :Smile_honoring:

Edited by _WaveRider_

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,914
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
22,178 posts
12,403 battles
1 minute ago, _WaveRider_ said:

Yes, he should get in an Asashio and spam torps from behind his CAs where he will have good AA cover. :Smile_facepalm:

Now I know you aren't advocating that, but at least give a fellow player the benefit of the doubt that he has to go forward to spot and that means not always being able to stay uber close to his CAs and benefit from their AA (who, if he does stay back,  will probably be screaming at him (along with the BBs) to push forward! :Smile_teethhappy:).

We do have players that aren't great at certain ship types but when Notser and Flambass think the situation is pretty bad for DDs (along with many others), then I don't think we can always put it down to poor play. :Smile_honoring:

A DD doesn't need to be behind his ships to be under their AA. The new meta really requires the team to move forward as a group at least initially. I am seeing DD's that are doing really well on the team charts so it can be done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,768
[RLGN]
Members
11,728 posts
20,719 battles
23 hours ago, _1204_ said:

I am not saying the rework is good, but it does remove the skill game that such a huge impact on the game.

Really...

What do you call it when some players can dance around AA like Fred Astaire while many others can't?

What do you call it when players are good at manual attacks, and many others aren't?

What is that if not that 'skill gap' that this so-called 'betterment of CV mechanics' was supposed to take care of?

Edited by Estimated_Prophet
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,213
[USCC2]
Members
4,937 posts
10 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

A DD doesn't need to be behind his ships to be under their AA. The new meta really requires the team to move forward as a group at least initially. I am seeing DD's that are doing really well on the team charts so it can be done.

Of course it can be done; that isn't the issue.

Let's just look back at the change to AP recently: Some BB players screaming that 'team play' is a joke (even when they were being asked to move forward in support and therefore receive the support of their screen). Doesn't happen they all said.

Now I am someone that wishes team play was more of a factor - but I'm sure you can see that where the BB can follow its screen in support (i.e. react to his team) - it is a little more difficult for the DD to lead and 'hope' his team will follow. Yes he can see if they don't and turn back, but that is just going to cause a weird caterpillar like movement forward lol. Also where the BB is reacting to the team, it has a nice pool of HP and Heals - a DD will not be so lucky if the team does not support.

 

I do not think ranting about the current situation helps  - I always try to use the evidence available. I'm guessing you may have been reacting to yet another rant(?) I just wanted to say even though a rant, it doesn't mean there isn't an issue. :Smile_honoring:

Edited by _WaveRider_

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,914
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
22,178 posts
12,403 battles
7 minutes ago, _WaveRider_ said:

Of course it can be done; that isn't the issue.

Let's just look back at the change to AP recently: Some BB players screaming that 'team play' is a joke (even when they were being asked to move forward in support and therefore receive the support of their screen). Doesn't happen they all said.

Now I am someone that wishes team play was more of a factor - but I'm sure you can see that where the BB can follow its screen in support (i.e. react to his team) - it is a little more difficult for the DD to lead and 'hope' his team will follow. Yes he can see if they don't and turn back, but that is just going to cause a weird caterpillar like movement forward lol. Also where the BB is reacting to the team, it has a nice pool of HP and Heals - a DD will not be so lucky if the team does not support.

 

I do not think ranting about the current situation helps  - I always try to use the evidence available. I'm guessing you may have been reacting to yet another rant(?) I just wanted to say even though a rant, it doesn't mean there isn't an issue. :Smile_honoring:

Yes, I was reacting to a rant but some times you just have to. :Smile_honoring:

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,555
Members
1,831 posts
6,013 battles
54 minutes ago, CanadianMonkeys said:

Title: thank you for making a joke of your own game

you think they should they be making a joke of somebody else's game(s)?

WG responded to thousands of complaints about CVs, by making a MAJOR change. If you read thru these forums regularly, it's hard to find 3 posts in a row that are written in a positive, constructive way, yet they plowed thru that steaming pile of hate and trolling, came to the conclusion they had to do something, and did.

is it perfect? hell, no. is it a major change? hell yes. hoping they will sort it out soon without causing more ruination to DD play, but I had already not been playing them much anyway... and I don't blame that on WG as much as my own poor skills in the DDs, and refusal to play less aggressively.

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,213
[USCC2]
Members
4,937 posts
11 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

Yes, I was reacting to a rant but some times you just have to. :Smile_honoring:

Fair enough. :Smile_honoring:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,591
[TBW]
Members
8,296 posts
15,099 battles
49 minutes ago, _WaveRider_ said:

He could indeed, or play lower tiers - but isn't it WG wish for people to not play Co-Op and strive to play the higher tiers. I say let the game play for a little while to see the real impact on game but....

I can't help but think, a mistake has been made. :Smile_honoring:

A mistake? Once I thought I was wrong but I was mistaken. Don't throw the baby out with the bath water. WG doesn't want to ruin the game and if this does ruin it, they can go back with the push of some buttons. You do have to hold your breath while swimming under water, well, if you want to live that is.

Edited by Sovereigndawg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,914
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
22,178 posts
12,403 battles
9 minutes ago, Spud_butt said:

you think they should they be making a joke of somebody else's game(s)?

WG responded to thousands of complaints about CVs, by making a MAJOR change. If you read thru these forums regularly, it's hard to find 3 posts in a row that are written in a positive, constructive way, yet they plowed thru that steaming pile of hate and trolling, came to the conclusion they had to do something, and did.

is it perfect? hell, no. is it a major change? hell yes. hoping they will sort it out soon without causing more ruination to DD play, but I had already not been playing them much anyway... and I don't blame that on WG as much as my own poor skills in the DDs, and refusal to play less aggressively.

CV's were broken in alpha and WG was never able to tweak them to where they were not broken and the tweaks, strafe anyone, actually made them even more broken. They decided to toss the old system completely and while I would have preferred a pure auto drop system where the player acts as the air group commander just setting up the strikes. Now AA definitely needs some fixes both buffs and debuffs but that hasn't stopped me from actually enjoying the game play even though I suck at torpedoes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,213
[USCC2]
Members
4,937 posts
23 minutes ago, Sovereigndawg said:

A mistake? Once I thought I was wrong but I was mistaken. Don't throw the baby out with the bath water. WG doesn't want to ruin the game and if this does ruin it, they can go back with the push of some buttons. You do have to hold your breath while swimming under water, well, if you want to live that is.

I have no idea what you are saying?

I said 'I can't help but think, a mistake has been made'. Do you feel this isn't a mistake, a mistake that isn't that bad, a mistake that is so bad it can't be ignored?

And you can swim under water and breathe - put a firkin snorkel on! :Smile_teethhappy:

Edited by _WaveRider_

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,555
Members
1,831 posts
6,013 battles
10 minutes ago, Sovereigndawg said:

(snip) You do have to hold your breath while swimming under water... (snip)

you are wrong, uh, I mean mistaken. :o) 

it's better if you never hold your breath, always let a little trickle of bubbles out. this will help to not over inflate your lungs while decompressing, and keep the muscles in the ribcage/diaphram relaxed. the relaxation helps provide substantially more oxygen transfer, which in turn reduces the need for more breathing.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,591
[TBW]
Members
8,296 posts
15,099 battles
1 hour ago, _WaveRider_ said:

And you can swim under water and breathe - put a firkin snorkel on!

If you go under water with a snorkel you still have to hold your breath.

1 hour ago, Spud_butt said:

you are wrong, uh, I mean mistaken. :o) 

it's better if you never hold your breath, always let a little trickle of bubbles out. this will help to not over inflate your lungs while decompressing, and keep the muscles in the ribcage/diaphram relaxed. the relaxation helps provide substantially more oxygen transfer, which in turn reduces the need for more breathing.

I stand corrected. This is especially true with scuba.

Edited by Sovereigndawg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,213
[USCC2]
Members
4,937 posts
10 hours ago, Sovereigndawg said:

If you go under water with a snorkel you still have to hold your breath.

I stand corrected. This is especially true with scuba.

No you don't - a snorkel is a tube  that allows you to swim under the water. If you go deeper then yes.

If you want to go further I don't see scuba divers holding their breath when they swim underwater.

Now having proved your statement incorrect, could you actually explain what you were trying to say:

First it looks as though you were saying WG doesn't make mistakes (they changed exactly what they expected to).  Then you say straight after 'if they did, they can change it back''. Contradictory - as you said they don't make mistakes! :Smile_amazed:

Honestly, I think you were trying to be clever and failed miserably, then broke the golden rule - when you're in a hole, don't dig yourself deeper! :Smile_teethhappy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38
Members
131 posts
2,173 battles
14 hours ago, BrushWolf said:

A DD doesn't need to be behind his ships to be under their AA. The new meta really requires the team to move forward as a group at least initially. I am seeing DD's that are doing really well on the team charts so it can be done.

Nah i like it when people group up so i can spam deep water torps in my hakuryu. 

 

14 hours ago, Sovereigndawg said:

A mistake? Once I thought I was wrong but I was mistaken. Don't throw the baby out with the bath water. WG doesn't want to ruin the game and if this does ruin it, they can go back with the push of some buttons. You do have to hold your breath while swimming under water, well, if you want to live that is.

Nah going back will be admitting that they were wrong and big companies cannot do that. Instead they will take the easier route with minor balancing.

Edited by Pyun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1
[MIR]
Members
5 posts
4,464 battles

its a funny thing... the navy stop producing bbs (and other types of ships) because they became obsolit over cv. Now the game has more realistics cvs. So whats the point on having bbs (and other types of ships)? Just for target practicing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,591
[TBW]
Members
8,296 posts
15,099 battles
8 hours ago, _WaveRider_ said:

If you want to go further I don't see scuba divers holding their breath when they swim underwater.

A snorkel allows you to breathe at the surface not under water. If you dive under water you hold your breath. Have you ever tried to breathe with a 2 foot snorkel? It does not work the water pressure does not allow you to breathe. Trust me I worked on a floating platform renting jet ski's in Maui for 12 years. 100's of night dives for lobster. I also made a lot of money recovering lost Items. I made $1000, 2 dozen doughnuts and a case of beer from a German national that lost his Gold Presidential Rolex. Recovered many wedding rings for people that are dumb enough to wear them in  the Ocean. I recovered a diesel engine from a sunken Sand-pan and one of my hoses burst. I have made many moorings and inspected and repaired them for many people. I think I may be qualified to state that you hold your breath when you dive under water with a snorkel, you may let some air out but you don't breath in until you are back at the surface. Scuba allows you to breathe under water and you never want to hold your breath while ascending, you always breathe out while ascending or you have an air embolism and die.

Edited by Sovereigndawg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,213
[USCC2]
Members
4,937 posts
1 hour ago, Sovereigndawg said:

A snorkel allows you to breathe at the surface not under water. If you dive under water you hold your breath. Have you ever tried to breathe with a 2 foot snorkel? It does not work the water pressure does not allow you to breathe. Trust me I worked on a floating platform renting jet ski's in Maui for 12 years. 100's of night dives for lobster. I also made a lot of money recovering lost Items. I made $1000, 2 dozen doughnuts and a case of beer from a German national that lost his Gold Presidential Rolex. Recovered many wedding rings for people that are dumb enough to wear them in  the Ocean. I recovered a diesel engine from a sunken Sand-pan and one of my hoses burst. I have made many moorings and inspected and repaired them for many people. I think I may be qualified to state that you hold your breath when you dive under water with a snorkel, you may let some air out but you don't breath in until you are back at the surface. Scuba allows you to breathe under water and you never want to hold your breath while ascending, you always breathe out while ascending or you have an air embolism and die.

Well I've gone scuba diving and breathed fine under water; I don't think I'm dead, so I guess all your expertise will have you coming to the same conclusion...

you can swim and breath under water at the same time. Again, now that is confirmed (because I am definitely alive), how about answering my initial question. :Smile_teethhappy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,591
[TBW]
Members
8,296 posts
15,099 battles
3 minutes ago, _WaveRider_ said:

Well I've gone scuba diving and breathed fine under water; I don't think I'm dead, so I guess all your expertise will have you coming to the same conclusion...

you can swim and breath under water at the same time. Again, now that is confirmed (because I am definitely alive), how about answering my initial question. :Smile_teethhappy:

Scuba would be useless if you could not swim and breathe under water. I said that you can not dive under water with a snorkel and breathe, A snorkel is not scuba. If you want to breath air from the surface while under water it has to be forced down to you. The Brownie's third lung is good for that.

brownies-f285be-Big-1.jpg.cc881a04d4e90cdfa3207052c1a75c00.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×