Jump to content


  • Content Сount

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles


Community Reputation

3 Neutral

About Covid_SpreadeR

  • Rank
    Lieutenant (junior grade)
  • Insignia

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  1. I assume he had 0 experience in cvs, which is a wrong assumption, I Made that assumption based on him being a little hard on for AA and him saying he dont support a ship that can damage/ sink things with no losses which obviously refers to cv. Now if you do check his stats, which I am right now currently, he does has experience in CVs. Which proves that me saying he has 0 exp in cvs very much confirmed I didnt check his stats just now, much less bought it up
  2. So you need to check stats, discredit the source of argument and person just so you can keep up with an argument against someone who had worst stats. OK.
  3. so where did i mention stats? you were the one assuming how i played my cvs, and even then I said I dont want to assumed how you play. I said 0 experience in cv because since you are an abit of an AA freak yourself and you saying you dont support the "sink something with almost no loss" ship . Granted I assume, but you did it first. So now you are assuming im checking stats? and where did i said i do better than others? If anything there wasnt even aa nerf. In fact is been getting better.Again I dont wan CBT/OBT CVs, But out of so many aa buff, asking for 1 aa buff to be revert is asking too much maybe? Well FT loadouts can be outplayed, AA is purely fixed aura and rng based. Both are annoying. If BB AA is so strong to the point it can make him get away from cv punishment even after running yolo solo in the match, Isnt that too much?
  4. No one said it was easy, these are the most well armored ships ever, since at that time naval warfare favoured more for tanky and armor on ships rather than speed/stealth like today. Sure it takes a damn long time, takes damn lot of planes and bombs and torpedoes, but slowly wearing the BB yamato and musashi while being out of spotting or even firing range was damn worth it, since at that point it isnt trading damage for damage anymore, is just straight up unfair fight from there. Its funny, you said pearl harbour wasnt devastating, but you said HMS hood is, like how is multiple ships getting rekted and knock out less devastating than one single HMS hood detonating? LOL Every single BB was a victim in that pearl harbour and you go LOL NOT DEVASTATING. Sure all were repaired except arizona, but damage is damage. Knock out means no longer able to participate any fight whatsoever without repairs. And Midway event was so devastating, japan became desperate to the point that they made plans for some BBs like fuso class and ise classs and CAs like mogami class to be converted to a half-carrier hybrid ships. If forcing a war participating country to plan something like this to alleviate the loss of 4 carriers isnt devastating, I really dont know what is. IIRC even aircraft submarine happened. Sure it was 4 cv that were sunk and not much for the BBs, but thats only because the usn knows the power of carrier (possibly from pearl harbour lessons) so they already knew opponent CVs were the bigger threat and not the nagato(s) with their 3% main battery hit rate . WASD is a struggle? OK lets keep it easy, dont WASD anymore alright?
  5. So then whos suppose to keep BB in check? BBs should the one who fear CVs most considering they dont have def AA fire consumable like CAs does, they are big, fat and very predicatable unlike dds are. You said most bbs have weak aa except t8+ BB, yet you still have no answer one my example scenario on how just a single t7 KM bb that wasnt aa spec could let 8 T7 FTs win against 12 T9 FTs. Not bias to AA you say Little effort, lol easy for someone who has 0 experience in CVs to say ROFLMAO even essex sometimes could get through aa spec iowa, then you didnt consider the times those planes didnt get through, bias or double standards? Shoukaku striking an nc shoudnt even be impossible, im not gonna assume or jump to conclusion about your position like how you assume my play on cvs. One shot? sure, everyone remembers it when planes deal tons of damage, but no one remembers when the planes didnt get through, but oh well bias is bias I didnt say its anyone's problem or fault i dont have AS or cant do anything. In fact i was the one doing more than the AS AIRSUPRE saipan, all thanks to a single ally t7 km bb rekting some of the T9 planes, which you claim has weak aa. And who told you I went for a bb at 18km? who told you I didnt kill a dd in the cap? jumping to assumptions too early ?
  6. But thats no excuse not to WASD. You mean you give up WASD just because you are the in the ship with the worst maneuverability? Obviously not. Sure, the ability to torpedo beat is weaker as you go up tiers, but then again there is such thing as keep turning to make yourself unpredictable so dds will reconsider torpping you. And even if they do, very likely they miss because you are well, unpredictable It was CV that made BBs obselete, and you saying here they should be supportive and should focus on smaller ships? When in history they were the ones who carried battles? Look at the damage done on pearl Harbour, look at battle of midway, arguably the one battle that lead to more losses for japan and subsequently lead to japan losing the war. And you say: lets make them supportive? even though you say you want games to reflect history? CV obviously will do that, lets not forget planes dont fly as fast as shells, and the cycle time can get up to 2mins. And CV cant even touch you if you group/dont go alone, so its not always all the time a cv can do that to you. The DmgCon usage thing is mostly to players who uses it at 1/2 fires and then when they get caught by torps from DD/CA/CV and get a flooding, they 100% deserve it You are calculating maximum damage, and lets be real here, montana wont hit all 12 shots. Sure Yamato wont hit all 9 shots, but consider yamato firstly has access to reload module, faster reload, more shells in the air, more shells landed, 2nd, she is the lolpen machine that doesnt really give a care about angling, while montana's shells do still care angles. Meaning there is more chances and more situations where montana shells will do lesser damage overall per shell. And third, she has the best vertical dispersion any bb has, at 2.1 sigma, and lets not forget IJN BBs generally are more accurate than other BBs at ranges >10 km. DPM and max alpha damage doesnt mean shit if you have more situation where you shell is either less accurate, or just deal less damage from angling in general Cruisers hit hard on caught out dd no doubt, but hitting hard and one shotting are two different things. IF I am a high tier cruiser, I much rather a BB salvo hit me hard, than to one shot me anytime. At least heal can bring me back up to the game somewhat. But deletion = no chance. Instant one hit KO is always more favourable than hitting smaller damage here and there over a period of time
  7. It is percentage based, thats why high tier bb take more DoT damage as lower tier ones, which makes sense So wasd hax isnt applicable on t10? OPS SORRY IM SUCH AN CASUAL, DIDNT KNOW THAT MR MAX TIER PLAYER. Dude I havent even talk about proper DamCon/repair usage which any player should have learn in low tiers. No one asked for a history lesson here, my point is that asking for historically and realistic stuff in an arcade-y game is quite dumb. I already did said cvs were the one who changed naval warface, and so much so that they are still relevant today. (Thank the lesson from pearl harbour) CVs do have hp as well? A 0 HP cv is almost as good as a 100% hp CV with 0 planes. 0 damage potential discounting ramming. Its is way easier for cvs to reach 0 damage potential state than BBs. Yamato biggest caliber guns in any ship has less total alpha damage? wow. Lets not forget she can equip the reload mod together with dispersion mod unlike USN BBs, and yamato has the best dispersion sigma value for BBs across all BBs and you say less damage? So if something is abit OP, lets nerf it, but also ask for a buff to cancel out the nerf? Yes it requires luck and RNG for a BB to one shot a cruiser, no doubt, but I dont see a cruiser one shot a dd from 95% to 0% unless "fun and engaging" happened. And even then Cruisers also can get the "fun and engaging" mechanic themselves, so technically its easier for a cruiser to get rekt from 100 to 0.
  8. I didnt say bug fix. A bug fix and making logical sense in game is different. Its logical for a high tier BB to take in more DOT damage than low tier BBs since 1. he has higher HP 2. He already should learn by now to WASD hax, since he is more experienced now at higher tiers. Low tier is for him to learn that 3. If a DD could predict his movement to land torps, he should be rewarded, simple. About the overpen getting citadel damage, it makes no sense either Pretty sure in game they did indicate somewhere along the lines that AP works by penning enough armor before the shell can explode inside the ship, dealing good amounts of damage. Flip it around and is not hard to think that if it didnt pen enough armor, it overpens, no explosion = low damage, pretty simple and logical There is even tons of videos for beginners telling AP works like this So why should an overpen on citadel area reward full citadel damage? If you want to quote history, then your argument is already invalid, This is a WG employee telling you history is 2nd priority, and gameplay is more important If you want historical accuracy, I dont see the ships that changed naval warfare altogether and still be relevant till this day being represented as VERY STRONG in this game I also dont see tons of DDs like 6 - 8 DDs every match. And what about crossing the T? Sounds like we have a case of selective history usage do we? Because the potential to one shot a cruiser isnt enough? Pretty sure there is more one shot deletion of cruisers by BBs than one shot deletion of DDs by Cruisers. While I do say you aim very well, better than me, MBH isnt the full story, since you mention Gnei, lets use her for an example Say I use her, and landed 6 shells out of all 6 on a ship on non citadel areas, I have 100% MBH (obviously wont happen but lets exaggerate) Say you use her, landed 2 shells out of 6 on a ship, but on a citadel, you have 33% MBH, much much lesser than me, but because you hit citadels, you deal much more damage. While MBH says some parts of how good your aim is, it doesnt says the whole story, since you need to take into account how well you aim for citadels and not just shp itself so alpha damage nerf and flood nerf to fix a "bug", even though there was no indication that air torps were different than dd torps. Granted they are easy to hit, so 2 nerfs for ONE reason? K, also lets not forget the constant AA buffs. What about the fact CV has limited planes to dish out damage while BBs dont have limited shells and gunpowder bags? those "nerfs" you say are either for logical sense reason, counter buffed back, or a certain thing is just straight up ridiculous even after compared with other BBs(yamato pre nerfed heal was a little crazy when compare to other bb's heals) The only nerf granted is the maneuverability nerfed, which was way too long ago
  9. On cv, heres the scenario. Im playing hiryu, 2/2/2, no t5 airsupre skill Im facing against a 301 saipan, with t5 airsupre skill All I need to do to control the air was simple, make my fighters dogfight saipan FTs under a single Gneisenau. Just a single t7 bb was enough to make sure 8 t7 fighters planes win 12 t9 fighters planes. Those are T9 planes, yet get rekted when it gets locked by lower number of fighters that are also lower tier above one single t7 bb thats wasnt even aa speced. If thats not the sign of aa being abit too strong for bbs(consider cvs are supposedly the one to keep bbs in check)then I dont know what is. But since you are so biased towards aa you probably wont say aa is strong anyways
  10. have you played any games before 0.5.3? no offense and if Im wrong I apologize but I dont think you play wows before 0.5.3 where there literally no cv players in queue whenever you play
  11. So one nerf compared to the multiple nerfs the other classes gets? And this nerf was like how many moons ago? OK granted my statement of that they didnt nerf BB was exaggeration. But BBs were never nerfed badly, at least compared to other classess Remember the nerfs that made CV extinct? literally 0 cv population. And now there are rumors of CV reworks in 2017 Also the nerfs to IJN DDs? Granted they wanted to stop torp soup but going so far as to nerf them to the point where they need a rework? dont see that happening to BBs
  12. 1. The damage that a higher Tier ship receives from flooding is no longer significantly less than the damage a lower Tier ship receives from the same flooding. I dont think thats nerf, is more of correction of sense. Higher tier has much more hp, the idea behind a ship with higher hp but takes lower DOT damage compare to a ship that has lower hp but takes higher dot damage make sense to you huh? 2.Citadel hits mechanics was changed a few months after OBT, causing far less citadel hits by battleships.(before this, a shell passing through citadel causes a citadel hit, regardless of overpen or not) While a later patch fixed a bug caused by this, still battleships hits far less citadels. Again I say this more correction than nerf. A citadel hit should only be counted when the shell explode inside. Its is the explosion that should deal damage, not the passing by of a mere shell. Back then when your shell fly past it still counts as if the shell exploded, fair? LOL 3.Torp detection range was buffed once then nerfed because torp soup area in high tier games, for the IJN ones that is, it then stayed where it is even though torp soup era has ended so long ago. Its so bad even the usn dd torps are stealthier now 4.Ships with a displacement of above 35000 tons got their maneuverability nerfed And thats it? At the same 5.1 patch notes air torps got nerfed too. 5.After an accuracy rework, battleships are now less accurate. If you can remember this, then you would remember the patch where they reworked the USN BB armors, and along with that comes with better accuracy to their guns, and then include the mod that -11% dispersion of main guns. This happened because they want their accuracy to be more balanced and fair vs the ijn bbs that were arguably more accurate than the usn bb in the past 6.HIJMS Yamato's repair party was nerfed only nerfed because it was too much in comparison with and against other bbs. It was nerfed to be equalized with other bbs 7.Skill rework. Before skill rework, last stand was a 4-point skill, and there wasn't survivability expert skill. Buff to DDs, because why? radar is coming,german hydro which was superior hydro was coming. and lets not forget even BB AP volleys are still dangerous to DDs today. The last stand buff and SE is what is making DDs more playable than before. From what I've heard of about CBT, DDs once had CITADELS, just imagine, 1 large caliber AP shell hitting the mid part of your destroyer, you get destroyed. Boom. Well, that isn't gonna happen anymore, unless you don't equip an anti-detonation signal flag. DDs were suppose to counter BBs, having citadel doesnt make sense, since any ship with citadels now is better for BBs than not having it since their AP volley to citadel damage are the highest. how would dd counter bb if dd has citadels for a single ap from bb to delete them?
  13. Give me the link that says BBs were nerfed Meanwhile in 0.5.X, there was AA buff There was buff to vigilance and addition of radar cruisers, which is a nerf to DDs Badly designed USN CV loadouts means lesser carrier population overall that punish BBs the hardest other than from DDs. All these even though BBs were deleting ships before. Yet received 0 nerfs for probably more than past 15 patches. I mean they are most played class for a reason afterall you know.
  14. Covid_SpreadeR

    What's worse than being a noob? A sour losing noob.

    As someone who clocked in more 2.2k hours in dota, and just finished my 2204th game in WOWs I can say a big yes. Game itself wise there is no competition, valve, who has more money, and better developers keeps flushing out bugs and glitches, while constantly adding new stuff. Community wise is where it gets interesting. WoWs have much older and matured audience, but ironically is more sensitive. One vulgar/curse word and there is a potential to get reported multiple times. Calling out someone can potentially get reported 7 times too. Its like the people in WoWs cant stand advices or criticism, and never listen to what they dont like to listen even though is what they need. At least in dota when someone gets called out you probably only receive on report. Granted there is lesser reports on dota and the punishment is harsher and granted karma does nothing, but abusing 7 reports just because someone telling you that whatever you are doing is questionable is pretty childish in my books, especially when you are talking about a game where the players playing this game are also working adults/married. Edit: And talk about balance, there isnt competition too. Sure dota has some flavor of the month heroes sometimes, but overall most heroes have been picked in tournaments and in competitive.(110 picked out of 112 in TI6) IceFrog, who balans the game knows his stuff definitely. Big nerfs usually happens to a hero when he was part of the "flavor of the month" gang. And others have slight buff or nerfs, so slight that it can take quite a long time for people to find out if he was powercreeped too much upwards or downwards against the 100++ other heroes. Meanwhile WG still struggles to balans the 2 cv lines, and TAP has some insight that WG might readjust the new IJN DD. WELP