Jump to content
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
Cit_the_bed

Made minor changes to the armor geometry of IV Imperator Nikolai I

14 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

1,601
[-ARP-]
[-ARP-]
Members
1,227 posts
19,387 battles

Can this change in the patch notes be explained better please. A lot of people spent money at christmas to get this ship, and changes need more explanation.

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,911
[WG]
Administrator, Developers, Community Department, WG Staff, In AlfaTesters
3,989 posts
14,378 battles
30 minutes ago, Cit_the_bed said:

Can this change in the patch notes be explained better please. A lot of people spent money at christmas to get this ship, and changes need more explanation.

Aloha,

As stated by @Femennenlyin your previous reply about this, when you see wording like "Minor changes in the armor geometry of Nikolai I and Hermes." it usually means that there was some sort of rendering or graphical abnormality found and cosmetic changes are needed. If there was any changes to actual armor values or values that might change her employment in battle we would have had numbers listed.

Mahalo,

-Hapa

  • Cool 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
531
[5D5]
Members
1,664 posts
9,846 battles
14 hours ago, BarnacleCollector said:

I hope they secretly nerfed it. That ship needs nerfing.

They already did, IMO.  Ship hasn't played the same for over a year. (I bought it on day one in the shop)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,656
[-K-]
Members
8,491 posts
14,883 battles
15 hours ago, BarnacleCollector said:

I hope they secretly nerfed it. That ship needs nerfing.

That ship got shadow-nerfed with the CV rework and consistent 2-3 CVs per match at low tier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
731
[--V--]
Members
1,453 posts
13,765 battles
1 hour ago, Ace_04 said:

That ship got shadow-nerfed with the CV rework and consistent 2-3 CVs per match at low tier.

But WG would never nerf a ship without telling the player base.   ROFL,,, oh,,, I crack myself up.

 

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,283
[SIMP]
Members
1,581 posts

Eh, don't worry.

It's got a Red Star on it, which means any 'cosmetic' changes probably removed real life flaws that allowed extra citadel hits to occur in-game. Thus making the ship more 'stronk'. (On any other nation 'cosmetic' changes means opening holes in the graphics to allow more citadel hits)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
694 posts
3,697 battles
28 minutes ago, SeaborneSumo said:

But WG would never nerf a ship without telling the player base.   ROFL,,, oh,,, I crack myself up.

 

Stealth nerf would fix a lot of stuff that the whinebase would otherwise go banana's about

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,258
[XBRTC]
Members
3,154 posts
10,065 battles
56 minutes ago, AzureTerra said:

Stealth nerf would fix a lot of stuff that the whinebase would otherwise go banana's about

 

You're kidding, right?

stealth nerf would only piss off the people that own it. The "whinebase" wouldn't know about it and would therefore continue to... well... y'know.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
694 posts
3,697 battles
8 hours ago, LT_Rusty_SWO said:

 

You're kidding, right?

stealth nerf would only piss off the people that own it. The "whinebase" wouldn't know about it and would therefore continue to... well... y'know.

Better than suggesting it be done then not doing when the whingers don't like what was needed. Point being is that WG need to make the changes they think need to be made and offer the whiners the option sell it if their precious sealclubber or whatever isn't as clubby. The actual functioning player-base will keep on playing the ship.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,258
[XBRTC]
Members
3,154 posts
10,065 battles
21 hours ago, AzureTerra said:

Better than suggesting it be done then not doing when the whingers don't like what was needed. Point being is that WG need to make the changes they think need to be made and offer the whiners the option sell it if their precious sealclubber or whatever isn't as clubby. The actual functioning player-base will keep on playing the ship.

 

Yeah, doubtful. That ship stopped being viable a year ago with the whole new CV crapfest. It doesn't really matter how good the guns are when you have no AA and there's 3 enemy carriers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,853
[-K-]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
7,300 posts
9,645 battles
On 1/14/2020 at 4:22 PM, BarnacleCollector said:

I hope they secretly nerfed it

They did. The nerf is called "two, sometimes three carriers per side"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
290
[WTAF]
Members
514 posts
16,730 battles

The game is a joke now. I just got done a run in KA, did 4,959 damage to planes (yes, FIVE THOUSAND) and shot down NONE. Explain that. Meanwhile, their two T4 CVs did 52,829 damage to me. Screenies to prove it. I took 6 torps, 15 bombs and 5 rockets. If I wasn't an expert at dealing with planes, I'd have been dead, and as it was it was close.

This doesn't border on ridiculous, it crossed that border a year ago. ONE CV PER SIDE. Let me get this straight: no one, and I mean NO ONE, wants 2 CVs per side, and yet they refuse to change it. Unreal, just unreal.

That run just said it all. I'm done with this game. Everyone I know has quit in disgust, and it is no longer fun. Time to move on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,110
[TARK]
Members
7,331 posts
2,747 battles
On 1/14/2020 at 3:11 PM, Hapa_Fodder said:

Aloha,

As stated by @Femennenlyin your previous reply about this, when you see wording like "Minor changes in the armor geometry of Nikolai I and Hermes." it usually means that there was some sort of rendering or graphical abnormality found and cosmetic changes are needed. If there was any changes to actual armor values or values that might change her employment in battle we would have had numbers listed.

Mahalo,

-Hapa

FYI, 

The ask is to state what was changed. Not to just state a blanket platitude.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×