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

NC rng and dispersion

39 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

160
[WAP]
Beta Testers
797 posts
10,513 battles

everything makes sense now WG if im too close I have to over pen every shell and or get your gravel thrown in the air dispersion buuuuuut if im to far away I get bounces on broadside ships for no damage and or your gravel in the air dispersion.

 

First 5 hits of the game into broadside iowa for 0 damage 10+ salvos of bracketing on ships (added note before anyone says o i dont see you posting your good games all the time I post this because this happens to Me more often then good games do and by often i mean on a hourly basis)
http://wowreplays.com/Replay/5256-RockaholicRaven-North-Carolina-Ice-Islands

Edited by RockaholicRaven

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,662
[CALM]
Beta Testers
6,838 posts
6,088 battles

NC, Iowa, and Montana are all getting some dispersion reduction so they don't bracket as badly as they do now, in the future.  (From RU Q&A)

 

With further adjustments to Iowa and Montana planned (probably quad Bofors on Iowa, more armor and/or speed+maneuverability on Montana, and AADF on both).  (Also from RU Q&A)

 

So fret not.  You may not get IJN accurate dispersion, but at least you will be guaranteed 1 shell hit per turret, assuming competent aiming, instead of none, if WG is going to go through with their plan to have multiple modest incremental changes in smaller patches so as to not over- or under-balance too much.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,644
[O7]
Alpha Tester, Alpha Tester
12,147 posts
9,111 battles

NC, Iowa, and Montana are all getting some dispersion reduction so they don't bracket as badly as they do now, in the future.  (From RU Q&A)

 

With further adjustments to Iowa and Montana planned (probably quad Bofors on Iowa, more armor and/or speed+maneuverability on Montana, and AADF on both).  (Also from RU Q&A)

 

So fret not.  You may not get IJN accurate dispersion, but at least you will be guaranteed 1 shell hit per turret, assuming competent aiming, instead of none, if WG is going to go through with their plan to have multiple modest incremental changes in smaller patches so as to not over- or under-balance too much.

 

The Devs didnt say you would get one hit from each turret guaranteed they just said they would increase it, we have no idea how much they will, it could be a very small amount or a lot we have no idea. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
970
[CRAYN]
Beta Testers
2,085 posts
4,674 battles

NC, Iowa, and Montana are all getting some dispersion reduction so they don't bracket as badly as they do now, in the future.  (From RU Q&A)

 

With further adjustments to Iowa and Montana planned (probably quad Bofors on Iowa, more armor and/or speed+maneuverability on Montana, and AADF on both).  (Also from RU Q&A)

 

I'm not too sure on them getting DF, but everything else makes sense.

 

Although I really don't see why Iowa/Montana should get an accuracy buffs. North Carolina does have some issues, but it is mostly people shooting at targets 18km out and wondering why they don't get any hits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12
Beta Testers
166 posts
6,247 battles

 

I'm not too sure on them getting DF, but everything else makes sense.

 

Although I really don't see why Iowa/Montana should get an accuracy buffs. North Carolina does have some issues, but it is mostly people shooting at targets 18km out and wondering why they don't get any hits.

 

Yeah, I play a lot of North Carolina and its accuracy isn't bad once you get down to 13-15km, which you can still do safely in T8 battles.  However, once you go past T8, BB engagement range increases a few km and it really does affect it badly.  Plus the fact that you really only effectively have 6 guns on the NC most of the time and it really starts to bring your damage output down when you are missing entire salvos or hitting 1 or 2 overpens.

 

I think you are right about the shooting at range thing.  This is the first true long range US BB people get and they feel that they have to use that range to be effective and it just doesn't work. 

Edited by D_bob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,644
[O7]
Alpha Tester, Alpha Tester
12,147 posts
9,111 battles

 

I'm not too sure on them getting DF, but everything else makes sense.

 

Although I really don't see why Iowa/Montana should get an accuracy buffs. North Carolina does have some issues, but it is mostly people shooting at targets 18km out and wondering why they don't get any hits.

 

Aww yes the old "USN ships are not just as good as their peers, they just have bad drivers" routine.
  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,053
[SYN]
Members
16,027 posts
12,803 battles

If I could get a refund, because a ship is bugged, then it would be for the NC.

 

Easily destroyed turrets? check

Turrets that have god awful arcs? check

Shells with god awful dispersion? check

Shells with god awful arcs? check

 

The only redeeming features it has is concealment and AA, but even those ABSOLUTELY require you to have a 16pt captain (CE+AFT+BFT) to be even remotely useful.

Edited by MrDeaf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
970
[CRAYN]
Beta Testers
2,085 posts
4,674 battles

 

Aww yes the old "USN ships are not just as good as their peers, they just have bad drivers" routine.

 

And you can keep on pulling the old "USN just sucks thanks to WG" routine all you want. It's the most childish and stupid argument I have ever seen. It's like you just want USN to suck so you can keep on "insulting" people who don't adhere to the "woe is me USN sucks what shall we do" shtick.
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,644
[O7]
Alpha Tester, Alpha Tester
12,147 posts
9,111 battles

 

And you can keep on pulling the old "USN just sucks thanks to WG" routine all you want. It's the most childish and stupid argument I have ever seen. It's like you just want USN to suck so you can keep on "insulting" people who don't adhere to the "woe is me USN sucks what shall we do" shtick.

 

Ok lets just dive right into personal attacks instead of saying why I dont think USN BBs deserve to be buffed. Seems like a mature way to start. 
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
970
[CRAYN]
Beta Testers
2,085 posts
4,674 battles

 

Ok lets just dive right into personal attacks instead of saying why I dont think USN BBs deserve to be buffed. Seems like a mature way to start. 

 

Funny you say that, when you were the one who did it first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,644
[O7]
Alpha Tester, Alpha Tester
12,147 posts
9,111 battles

 

Funny you say that, when you were the one who did it first.

 

I was just calling out the old argument that has been disproved multiple times you were trying to pull again. That moment when it counts as a personal attack like calling someone stupid and childish...
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
970
[CRAYN]
Beta Testers
2,085 posts
4,674 battles

 

I was just calling out the old argument that has been disproved multiple times you were trying to pull again. That moment when it counts as a personal attack like calling someone stupid and childish...

 

Maybe you should read my words again. Please tell me where I called you stupid and childish.

 

Unless you are now the physical manifestation of your own arguments...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,644
[O7]
Alpha Tester, Alpha Tester
12,147 posts
9,111 battles

 

Maybe you should read my words again. Please tell me where I called you stupid and childish.

 

Unless you are now the physical manifestation of your own arguments...

 

You are absolutely right, I did misread what you said. That however does not change the fact that misconstruing my argument does not at all change the issue that you think USN ships should not be buffed. Are you going to provide any evidence that the high tier USN BBs are just as competitive as their peers at high tiers or are you going to continue to insult and play petty games? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
943 posts
4,083 battles

Admiral_Mitscher_speaking_with_David_McC
 

but seriously NC needs buff, atm it plays like a Colorado getting shot gun dispersion

v4ouyAr.png

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
184
Alpha Tester
993 posts
1,106 battles

The NC feels more like a slot machine than any other ship in the game now

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
160
[WAP]
Beta Testers
797 posts
10,513 battles

 

Ok lets just dive right into personal attacks instead of saying why I dont think USN BBs deserve to be buffed. Seems like a mature way to start. 

 

all godzilla ever does in any of my forums is troll just a heads up its a shame WG doesnt have an option to make your forums invisible to certain people he would be indefinitely on my never welcome in my forum list
Edited by RockaholicRaven

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
970
[CRAYN]
Beta Testers
2,085 posts
4,674 battles

 

You are absolutely right, I did misread what you said. That however does not change the fact that misconstruing my argument does not at all change the issue that you think USN ships should not be buffed. Are you going to provide any evidence that the high tier USN BBs are just as competitive as their peers at high tiers or are you going to continue to insult and play petty games? 

 

 

I mean sure, let's just ignore the fact that I completely passed over the fact that Iowa/Montana are likely to get buffs in almost all aspects. I didn't have any objection to that, did I?

 

I only specifically mentioned the possible accuracy buff that I was not in favor of.

 

But let's paint it as "I'm now against any kind of buff for any USN ship" and be happy and smug about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
1,198 posts
2,732 battles

 

I'm not too sure on them getting DF, but everything else makes sense.

 

Although I really don't see why Iowa/Montana should get an accuracy buffs. North Carolina does have some issues, but it is mostly people shooting at targets 18km out and wondering why they don't get any hits.

You haven't even played those ships to know remotely how they perform just shows how big a troll you are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,644
[O7]
Alpha Tester, Alpha Tester
12,147 posts
9,111 battles

 

I mean sure, let's just ignore the fact that I completely passed over the fact that Iowa/Montana are likely to get buffs in almost all aspects. I didn't have any objection to that, did I?

 

I only specifically mentioned the possible accuracy buff that I was not in favor of.

 

But let's paint it as "I'm now against any kind of buff for any USN ship" and be happy and smug about it.

 

ohh another personal attack, this is really moving things along.

 

This goes along with whichita and his "we cant buff USN ships much, they might be good" thing. Lets just assume all the other buffs are significant enough without accuracy changes to make the ships good enough for Godzilla to like them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
970
[CRAYN]
Beta Testers
2,085 posts
4,674 battles

 

all godzilla ever does in any of my forums is troll just a heads up its a shame WG doesnt have an option to make your forums invisible to certain people he would be indefinitely on my never welcome in my forum list

 

After you told me to kill myself, I'm pretty sure I own the right to completely ignore anything you say and never take you seriously ever again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
970
[CRAYN]
Beta Testers
2,085 posts
4,674 battles

 

ohh another personal attack, this is really moving things along.

 

This goes along with whichita and his "we cant buff USN ships much, they might be good" thing. Lets just assume all the other buffs are significant enough without accuracy changes to make the ships good enough for Godzilla to like them. 

 

Jesus Christ.

 

I [edited]agree with literally all the buffs that have been proposed, except one, and you go off and claim that I can't allow USN ships to be too good?

 

What the actual [edited].

 

How about you grow up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,644
[O7]
Alpha Tester, Alpha Tester
12,147 posts
9,111 battles

 

Jesus Christ.

 

I [edited]agree with literally all the buffs that have been proposed, except one, and you go off and claim that I can't allow USN ships to be too good?

 

What the actual [edited].

 

How about you grow up.

 

Does this count as a personal attack or is this just attacking my argument still? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
970
[CRAYN]
Beta Testers
2,085 posts
4,674 battles

 

Does this count as a personal attack or is this just attacking my argument still? 

 

I give up. You win. There is legitimately no reason to ever argue with you. You nitpick and find fault with everything I say. Nothing I ever do will be satisfactory. I am permanently wrong in your eyes and nothing will ever change that.

 

Congratulations.

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.

×