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

WG's Kitakami mistake.

130 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

8,408
[GGWP]
Members
7,577 posts
17,880 battles

So there has been a leak on EU about WG telling Testers with Kitakami that they should not play it in triple divisions. Mated to this piece of info was a screenshot of a WGEU triple div in Kitakamis. As hilarious, ironic and tonedeaf as that is, it begs a very interesting question:

If a ship is deemed to be toxic and lead to complaints while being tested... What do they expect to happen when its released and if they need to go so far to warn testers that they probably shouldn't play it in triple divs, then is it really in the best interest of the game to even consider releasing this ship??? How clueless is WG in this whole situation?

Edited by Ducky_shot
  • Cool 7
  • Funny 1
  • Thanks 20
  • Boring 2
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,286
[GWG]
Members
7,579 posts
14,439 battles

Unless it's FOUR triple divisions sync-dropped into the same battle.

  • Funny 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,408
[GGWP]
Members
7,577 posts
17,880 battles
Just now, AVR_Project said:

Unless it's FOUR triple divisions sync-dropped into the same battle.

YEah that definitely won't happen.... /s

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,742
[WOLFG]
Members
33,524 posts
10,430 battles

I think it's silly not to let testers triple div it, unless they're going to disallow that after release.

Don't get me wrong, I think it's dusgusting, but it's not like elite clan STs are the only ones who would do such a thing. Might as well see the worst-case scenario.

But yeah, I can't believe that they would release this ship. They were hated in NavyField, and often excluded from matches. And in that game, it was pretty much all open water, so Kitas were forced to launch from max range, and there was plenty of time to see the web of torps coming, and plot a path through. (there was no avoiding them entirely, 2 Kitas would have torps running from top to bottom of the map)

Here, the target can't spot the torps until they're close, and with all the islands, unless you're out in open water, they can make a fan of torps too thick to dodge. And those islands mean the Kita can get closer, so the torps are closer together. (I don't remember many NF Kitas surviving long enough to reload)

 

  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,667
[WOLFG]
Members
12,566 posts
11,670 battles

Think about this.

They are going to give bots these ships.

That's right.  20 torps off the wrong side of the ship in to their teammates.

  • Funny 6
  • Haha 10
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,107
[FOXEH]
Banned
14,364 posts
20,811 battles
26 minutes ago, Ducky_shot said:

How clueless is WG in this whole situation?

CV rework.

Puerto Rico debacle.

Alabama supertester only idea.

Graf Zeppelin state at time of her original release.

BB bow armor nerf. 

And, just recently, the state of the USN BBs to be offered in the line split.

How clueless do they seem to you?

  • Cool 17
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
  • Sad 1
  • Boring 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
489
[BUOY]
Members
1,324 posts
16,828 battles
30 minutes ago, Ducky_shot said:

So there has been a leak on EU about WG telling Testers with Kitakami that they should not play it in triple divisions. Mated to this piece of info was a screenshot of a WGEU triple div in Kitakamis. As hilarious, ironic and tonedeaf as that is, it begs a very interesting question:

If a ship is deemed to be toxic and lead to complaints while being tested... What do they expect to happen when its released and if they need to go so far to warn testers that they probably shouldn't play it in triple divs, then is it really in the best interest of the game to even consider releasing this ship??? How clueless is WG in this whole situation?

Honestly, if they released the Kitakami withe a 1 per div limit like CV's just so they could release her, that'd be fine. 

Yes, she'll be cancer right after release, but honestly probably less so than Smolensk thanks to the binary nature of torp soup and the backbiting nature of all those torps. So there will be more lulz.

4 minutes ago, DrHolmes52 said:

Think about this.

They are going to give bots these ships.

That's right.  20 torps off the wrong side of the ship in to their teammates.

They'll probably be programmed to only release within 3km of an enemy ship or something like most bot DD'S do now.

Edited by lloyd1701

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,884
[46856]
Members
2,038 posts

120 torpedoes in the water what could go wrong with such a div?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,004
[SYN]
Members
15,968 posts
12,803 battles

If the statement is true, that would be the most hilariously out of touch comment coming from WG in a while.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,021
[HINON]
Members
8,978 posts
13,134 battles

id just keep doing triple divs of them, just to show WG how big of a mistake it is to even THINK of bringing this ship back unless team damage is done away with

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,881
[PVE]
Members
7,318 posts

I suspect the availability of the Kitakami is going to be so limited triple divisions won't be a problem.  I think this ship goes straight into creates with a very low drop rate. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,408
[GGWP]
Members
7,577 posts
17,880 battles
9 minutes ago, tcbaker777 said:

id just keep doing triple divs of them, just to show WG how big of a mistake it is to even THINK of bringing this ship back unless team damage is done away with

They haven't outright banned it from triple divs, but strongly encouraged to not do so, so yeah, players that have it should go ahead. 

The problem with removing team damage means you'll have 20km shimas sitting in the back launching torps with the bbs. 

Edited by Ducky_shot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,299
[-BUI-]
Members
2,703 posts
7,030 battles
2 minutes ago, Slimeball91 said:

I suspect the availability of the Kitakami is going to be so limited triple divisions won't be a problem.  I think this ship goes straight into creates with a very low drop rate. 

That won't make it all that rare...I personally have every ship possible from the xmas crates, so I could get it for like $20.   

I just hope its not a Research Bureau ship, cause I really wanna play this stupid thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
13 posts
2,644 battles
27 minutes ago, Skpstr said:

Here, the target can't spot the torps until they're close, and with all the islands, unless you're out in open water, they can make a fan of torps too thick to dodge. And those islands mean the Kita can get closer, so the torps are closer together. (I don't remember many NF Kitas surviving long enough to reload)

 

I think they ran out of ammo...

Navy field you did not have unlimited rounds like we do

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
467 posts
8,389 battles

Also all those torpedoes will be expensive.  They cost about the same as a large battleship shell per torpedo. At Tier X service costs.

Give it a reload booster and watch everyone cry (the enemy because there are 80 torpedoes in the water.  Friendlies.....because there are 80 torpedoes in the water.  And the player...because that's 80 shells worth of credits going out to who knows where all at once.)

Edited by ithekro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,757
[KWF]
Members
6,358 posts
7,145 battles

It's WG we are talking about.  WG that considered the unnerfed version of Smolensk as fit for release.

The  same one that slapped a paint on Roma and sold it as Littorio.

The same one that thought CVs in their current form in CB was a very good idea.

The same one that nerfed California before release, making the ship essentially DOA

The list can go on for quite a bit for dozens of events that show WG often makes big mistakes when it comes to balance. Is it miscommunication, refusal to listen to testers, influence from marketing and sales department? 

No idea, but bringing Kitakami  back is one of their dumber ideas. I think it's also the only ship in the game's history to be released, only to be immediately pulled. Don't like talking about the sky falling, but can't help be pessimistic.

As for ST divisions, normally I don't like seeing a full division with only test ships; in the case of Kitakami however it's a good exercise in a worst case scenario.

  • Cool 2
  • Funny 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
990
[TIMT]
Members
1,700 posts
5,581 battles
1 minute ago, warheart1992 said:

As for ST divisions, normally I don't like seeing a full division with only test ships; in the case of Kitakami however it's a good exercise in a worst case scenario.

I mean, isn't this the point of ST to figure things like this out? To test ships and concepts to the limit is just prudent. They could maybe refrain from doing all the time, but as you said it is good to test the 'worst case'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,286
[GOB]
Members
2,736 posts

I'm just used to by now... There will be the people complaining and the usual WG apologists ( that get the ship ) will just use their simplistic defense of everything WG does.

JUST DODGE!

BleakScarceEland-max-1mb.gif

Edited by Col_Nasty
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
4,629 posts
45,333 battles

Hmm, well. An alpha tester once told me it was a nightmare. The Prep H was strong in those matches. I missed out.

But I promise here and now, I do solemnly swear to never division if I got one with another Kita. Nope, there is no fun unless you make red dance all by yourself and say: "Dance puppets!"

I want to be the only one in the match.

Division, and you just share the infamy.

I can be infamous all by myself thank you very much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,742
[WOLFG]
Members
33,524 posts
10,430 battles
43 minutes ago, DuxMagnus said:

I think they ran out of ammo...

Navy field you did not have unlimited rounds like we do

No, they had enough for 2 rounds. (I think Kuma-Kai only had room for one, unless you only used quad launchers) I believe you had to run with no guns to offset the weight.

The ammo was limited, true, but I only remember ammo being an issue when you shoehorned in guns meant for a higher level ship. (Like having dual 8" turrets on Cleveland, Colorado guns on a New Mex, or Iowa guns on an NC)

Edited by Skpstr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,629
[WPORT]
Members
9,766 posts
14,296 battles

If this is the same DD I saw in a match on Sunday (yesterday), I was wondering what sort of caffeine the main-gun loaders were drinking.
The fire-hose of projectiles whittled a Kaga with 70% health down to nothing in a couple of minutes or less.

Edited to add:
Kitakami's WOWs-wiki page is deleted or a work in progress sort of place-holder.

Kitakaze's WOWs-wiki page is for a DD and not a Cruiser.

Might have been a Kitakaze I saw.

Edited by Wolfswetpaws

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,884
[46856]
Members
2,038 posts
4 minutes ago, Wolfswetpaws said:

If this is the same DD I saw in a match on Sunday (yesterday), I was wondering what sort of caffeine the main-gun loaders were drinking.
The fire-hose of projectiles whittled a Kaga with 70% health down to nothing in a couple of minutes or less.

Its a cruiser.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,629
[WPORT]
Members
9,766 posts
14,296 battles
Just now, Chain_shot said:

Its a cruiser.

I edited my post, after some research.
Thanks for providing clarification.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×