Jump to content
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
Bandi73

A...kind of funny, well......

59 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

813
[-BCO-]
Members
1,835 posts
3,390 battles

Well, the state of the aa in this game. Isn't a.....kind of funny? I'm not detracting from the Cv driver's  play, but.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
337
[CHA0S]
Members
241 posts
2,955 battles

From the very video...

image.png.e88d8368088ae3d324c2c71892ef2711.png

Honestly though, Jingles provides no evidence for the first two-thirds of the match to show the two CAs took no HE damage.

No problem with endless torpedoes, just endless planes.

Hindenburg gives broadside to a Thunderer at 4.5km, eats six of her 8 barrels - AP! - doesn't die.  No problemo.

"There's three ships" - rarara, they're all basically floating wrecks, but no matter.

Does he even play the game anymore?

Should the devs/mods create a pinned thread for every time Jingles posts a video somebody wants to hold up and go "Look, he thinks what I think!"

It's all so tiring.

  • Cool 2
  • Thanks 2
  • Boring 4
  • Meh 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
813
[-BCO-]
Members
1,835 posts
3,390 battles
10 minutes ago, WaywardVariable said:

Thanks for sharing @Bandi73, dang the Petro is a monster, time to start working on the Soviet Cruiser line! :Smile_izmena:

Yep. It was hilarious in the last regular ranked to cit left and right BB's like they were made of paper. Some people probably didn't see the videos about her and kept broadsiding.Ouch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
813
[-BCO-]
Members
1,835 posts
3,390 battles
24 minutes ago, crazyeightyfive said:

From the very video...

image.png.e88d8368088ae3d324c2c71892ef2711.png

Honestly though, Jingles provides no evidence for the first two-thirds of the match to show the two CAs took no HE damage.

No problem with endless torpedoes, just endless planes.

Hindenburg gives broadside to a Thunderer at 4.5km, eats six of her 8 barrels - AP! - doesn't die.  No problemo.

"There's three ships" - rarara, they're all basically floating wrecks, but no matter.

Does he even play the game anymore?

Should the devs/mods create a pinned thread for every time Jingles posts a video somebody wants to hold up and go "Look, he thinks what I think!"

It's all so tiring.

Well, Jingles are many things, but don't think for a second that dishonest could be numbered among them. And the problem isn't necessary the number of planes, but the state of the AA (as how big a joke it is, right now) and how many things go in favour of Cv's. That's what makes Cv's an inherently dishonest class. In wows. And yes the ships took a good beating and meanwhile the Cv? Plane regeneration isn't impeded in any way, even if the Cv get direct hits. 

But, I agree, it is tiring. And quite unfun. But, lol,  you know, just dodge.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
251
[RCNW6]
Members
425 posts
12 minutes ago, Bandi73 said:

Yep. It was hilarious in the last regular ranked to cit left and right BB's like they were made of paper. Some people probably didn't see the videos about her and kept broadsiding.Ouch.

It appears sailing broadside to that monster is just a guaranteed quick return to port and I thought the U.S. Heavy Cruiser AP was vicious! that thing really does have rail guns on it.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
337
[CHA0S]
Members
241 posts
2,955 battles
Just now, Bandi73 said:

don't think for a second that dishonest could be numbered among them

I'll grant you this - I'm just pointing out that he doesn't provide evidence, perhaps because he wasn't provided any himself.  Nor of the Captain Skills, but yes, I won't assume he's lying.
 

2 minutes ago, Bandi73 said:

And the problem isn't necessary the number of planes, but the state of the AA

I think this is a matter of perception.  Some players want to be all but invulnerable due to their AA, and we should all ask ourselves if this is reasonable.  I've seen entire squadrons downed in one pass by one ship, yet somehow if you eat a single bomb or torpedo from the drop it's not good enough.  I'm not saying you feel this way, only that a significant amount of the rhetoric around AA seems to think it should essentially be a force-field, which in my opinion is just silly.

6 minutes ago, Bandi73 said:

how many things go in favour of Cv's

6 minutes ago, Bandi73 said:

Plane regeneration isn't impeded in any way, even if the Cv get direct hits

I've no problem admitting that CVs should detonate more easily than other ships, let alone at all.  And that plane launching or regeneration should be affected or hampered by being on or under fire.

Perhaps even making the CV have 'ammo' types and have to 'switch' ammo like others by selecting a type of squadron, and then being forced to use it while the other 'ammo type' 'reloads' in the background.

I am not familiar - at all - with CVs, so I'm only floating poorly thought-out ideas.

Thank you for the reasonable response.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
813
[-BCO-]
Members
1,835 posts
3,390 battles
7 minutes ago, crazyeightyfive said:

I think this is a matter of perception.  Some players want to be all but invulnerable due to their AA, and we should all ask ourselves if this is reasonable.  I've seen entire squadrons downed in one pass by one ship, yet somehow if you eat a single bomb or torpedo from the drop it's not good enough.  I'm not saying you feel this way, only that a significant amount of the rhetoric around AA seems to think it should essentially be a force-field, which in my opinion is just silly.

Well......AA can't be even nominally balanced, when T8 Cv's can see ships ( and AA) ranging from T6-T10. Against T6 they are OP, against T10 they are weak.Cv's should see only  =/+1 tier ships. But even then, some ships,full  AA specced, should be able to create punishment for the Cv. Just like some cruisers can't brawl Bb's, the same principle should apply to Cv's.  

7 minutes ago, crazyeightyfive said:

Perhaps even making the CV have 'ammo' types and have to 'switch' ammo like others by selecting a type of squadron, and then being forced to use it while the other 'ammo type' 'reloads' in the background.
 

Something along those lines I'm constantly pitching. Namely plane regen should be slowed down across the board and then by a means of a consumable  (or a function) Cv's should be able to selectively accelerate plane regen at the expense of hull HP.

7 minutes ago, crazyeightyfive said:

Thank you for the reasonable response.

Thanks and the same to you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,383
[WOLFG]
Members
32,288 posts
10,008 battles
17 minutes ago, crazyeightyfive said:

I think this is a matter of perception.  Some players want to be all but invulnerable due to their AA, and we should all ask ourselves if this is reasonable.  I've seen entire squadrons downed in one pass by one ship, yet somehow if you eat a single bomb or torpedo from the drop it's not good enough.  I'm not saying you feel this way, only that a significant amount of the rhetoric around AA seems to think it should essentially be a force-field, which in my opinion is just silly..

You know what else is silly? FDR TBs completely ignoring AA and dumping torpedoes into you from point-blank range.

TBH, I think the biggest problem with AA is that it's feast or famine. Either the CV player is unskilled/completely outmatched, and loses a squadron to no good effect, or the first attack goes through with all ordnance dropped 

What I would like to see is a lot more middle ground. If I have at least decent AA, I want to shoot down at least one of the planes attacking me, not the waiting "cannon fodder" planes.

What might work is reducing squadron sizes, so appreciable losses actually affect the ordnance coming at you in any one strike.

That's the thing with the RTS days, yes you had more planes coming at you, but every plane you shot down was one less that was going to drop on you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,046
Members
5,653 posts
10,989 battles

Everytime I see AA is useless - I think of the planes I shot down.  I love Jingles as well but the Deadeye and AA rants are getting to me.  AA is not in the least dead nor is pushing and Deadeye does not instantly delete everything it touches like some people want to think.  Hell - in most of my games since the rework I have had less games of people camping at the back.  Hell - even secondaries are still viable....

But Jingles does admit when he is incorrect - take RPF which he thought would kill the game and make it far to easy for those with it to play but it wasn't nearly as bad as he thought.  I think he will see the same with CVs, Deadeye, and AA eventually.  I have made posts on his YT videos disputing what he says and I sent in a replay as well showing how well some of the things he said don't work...  He does read the comments so I will give him the benefit that he will see reality sooner than later...

Edited by CylonRed
  • Cool 1
  • Boring 1
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
813
[-BCO-]
Members
1,835 posts
3,390 battles
5 minutes ago, CylonRed said:

Everytime I see AA is useless - I think of the planes I shot down. 

AA is useless if a fully AA specced AA ship cannot prevent a strike against himself, let alone to protect others. By the very definition.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,383
[WOLFG]
Members
32,288 posts
10,008 battles
36 minutes ago, Bandi73 said:

And the problem isn't necessary the number of planes, but the state of the AA

It's not the number of planes, but how they attack, along with how the AA handles the difference between those planes attacking, and those waiting to attack.

The biggest problem IMO is that the "waiting to attack" planes aren't considered as such, but "cannon fodder".

IOW, WG intended shooting down "waiting" planes to be beneficial, by reducing the number of strikes. Players found it easy to be successful with one or two strikes out of every attack, so losing the "waiting" planes (which weren't going to attack anyway) doesn't hurt much.

I feel that the AA system, with it's flak and continuous separate, is an elegant concept, but the way it differentiates between attacking and waiting planes means that targets will basically either completely negate the attack, or the first strike will get through at full strength.

Something needs to be done to give ships a chance to blunt each wave in turn. Perhaps that means shifting some of the focus from the waiting planes to those attacking.

It may or may not allow an extra strike, but would give a chance to blunt each strike in turn, so shooting down planes would matter more. Instead of every first strike always getting through at full strength, there would be the chance to reduce the ordnance dropped 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,046
Members
5,653 posts
10,989 battles
3 minutes ago, Bandi73 said:

AA is useless if a fully AA specced AA ship cannot prevent a strike against himself, let alone to protect others. By the very definition.

So in a game that is not a simulation, and AA spec ship should always shoot down 100% of the planes?  Please, that would be so OP it is not funny and down right idiotic.  There has to be a balance or else an entire line of ships is useless and people will predominately only drive AA spec ships.  There are a number of BBs that do not have to worry about CVs due to shooting planes down and if a torp hits - the amount of damage done.  Only time I worry about them is in the UK cruisers and even then - pretty easy to shot planes down and to avoid the torps.  I have used the stock hulls to help shield other ships in UK cruisers.   Not shooting down 30+ planes but do serious damage to the attack.

Edited by CylonRed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,383
[WOLFG]
Members
32,288 posts
10,008 battles
11 minutes ago, CylonRed said:

Everytime I see AA is useless - I think of the planes I shot down.  

That's just it, think of the planes you shot down.

How many of them were actually the immediate threat, the ones boring down on you, ready to drop, vs. the ones who were maybe or maybe not going to attack you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
813
[-BCO-]
Members
1,835 posts
3,390 battles
1 minute ago, CylonRed said:

So in a game that is not a simulation, and AA spec ship should always shoot down 100% of the planes?  Please, that would be so OP it is not funny and down right idiotic.

Erm....so one when invest into modules and skills shouldn't be able to see the return?? Lolz, just what are you talking about??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,046
Members
5,653 posts
10,989 battles
2 minutes ago, Skpstr said:

That's just it, think of the planes you shot down.

How many of them were actually the immediate threat, the ones boring down on you, ready to drop, vs. the ones who were maybe or maybe not going to attack you?

Depending on the ship - both and if it is damage to those that will attack others - isn't that a good thing as well?  It wold prevent a full attack on another teammate, which should be a good thing as well. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
813
[-BCO-]
Members
1,835 posts
3,390 battles
20 minutes ago, Skpstr said:

What I would like to see is a lot more middle ground. If I have at least decent AA, I want to shoot down at least one of the planes attacking me, not the waiting "cannon fodder" planes.

That's one the major problems. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,046
Members
5,653 posts
10,989 battles
Just now, Bandi73 said:

Erm....so one when invest into modules and skills shouldn't be able to see the return?? Lolz, just what are you talking about??

Uh - a return isn't being so OP that it breaks an entire line of ships...  So no - the only reasonable result is NOT to shoot down 100% of the planes that go to attack you or your teammates.  try less hyperbole and a bit more common sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,426
Banned
1,424 posts
6,083 battles

A single ship can take down 4 without ever being at risk of getting damaged, let alone destroyed. And people still think it is fine. This game is beyond repair.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
813
[-BCO-]
Members
1,835 posts
3,390 battles
1 minute ago, CylonRed said:

Uh - a return isn't being so OP that it breaks an entire line of ships...  So no - the only reasonable result is NOT to shoot down 100% of the planes that go to attack you or your teammates.  try less hyperbole and a bit more common sense.

Bud, a full AA specced AA ship( DFAA, fighter) cannot defend himself from planes, let alone others. Just.... what is hyperbolic about that fact?? What version of the game you are playing??.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,383
[WOLFG]
Members
32,288 posts
10,008 battles
2 minutes ago, CylonRed said:

So in a game that is not a simulation, and AA spec ship should always shoot down 100% of the planes?  Please, that would be so OP it is not funny and down right idiotic.  

You're right, an AA spec ship always shooting down 100% of the planes would indeed be OP.

However, an AA spec ship regularly (not always) shooting down 1 or 2 of the planes on an attack run seems kind of intuitive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
813
[-BCO-]
Members
1,835 posts
3,390 battles
4 minutes ago, Skpstr said:

You're right, an AA spec ship always shooting down 100% of the planes would indeed be OP.

However, an AA spec ship regularly (not always) shooting down 1 or 2 of the planes on an attack run seems kind of intuitive.

Well, I disagree, because if a full AA specced, AA ship is not able to defend himself, then the question is, who can?.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,092
[SIM]
Members
5,787 posts
9,263 battles

It’s a huge testament to how poor this game’s community has become that it still takes Jingles seriously. He’s an out of touch casual that only begrudgingly creates content in order to pay his bills. Sometimes entertaining, no longer insightful. 

Edited by SkaerKrow
  • Cool 1
  • Boring 1
  • Meh 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×