Jump to content

Farlesquew

Member
  • Content Сount

    101
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    9864
  • Clan

    [TF44]

Community Reputation

70 Recognized

About Farlesquew

  • Rank
    Lieutenant
  • Insignia

Profile Information

  • Location
    South Australia

Recent Profile Visitors

921 profile views
  1. Farlesquew

    People you've encountered in-game

    @Rina_Pon was captaining a Sims on the green team a couple of days ago. Other side of the map, but it looked as though he held up an entire red flank before eventually being overwhelmed. IIRC, his efforts weren't wasted and we managed a win.
  2. I got the Molotov... I've barely touched the Russian botes, so it'll be a learning curve.
  3. Farlesquew

    RN DD Commander Skills?

    Thanks for that Drakon233! At some point I became attached to the concept of using Radio Location, but maybe it isn't necessary? My Jutland set up is: PT > LS > SE > CE > RL > PM Might I assume that after ~22k battles you simply don't need Radio Location (as experience indicates red behaviour)? I've never yet used IFE on anything, but I can see how your JoaT + SI maximises your survival ability if things get hot, and I suppose you're looking hard at anything inside 4.5kms (so IFE replaces PT). Any comments you can make on playstyle differences between our two builds would be appreciated!
  4. Farlesquew

    CO-OP all bots

    We must have done a Vulcan mind meld at some stage because I to hear that same damn inner voice all too often!
  5. Farlesquew

    CO-OP all bots

    Ok, some general ideas. Note that I'm playing these co-op games at breakfast (my time) as the server is quiet then so co-op is fast - so I'm tending to play these games at lower tiers (generally VI-VIII), which may mean different behaviour from higher tiers? Main thing I'm aware of is early bot DD behaviour: they tend to rush 'at' each other and generally one pair will ram-delete each other. Knowing this, I'll try to target the red DD before hand as being a DD up is always a good thing. Keep an eye out for cruisers and BBs doing something similar (though later in game, because being slower they take longer to close on each other). Cruisers and BBs don't tend to ram, but as they pass each other they tend to slow to a stop. Being aware of these moments provides great opportunities for hitting stopped/slow targets. You're possibly right re the BBs (late game) coming at you as a pack? I hadn't thought about it that way - I just figured it makes sense that as the green team diminishes the reds will converge on 'me'. Understand that this is how it plays out and think ahead so that you'll be able to use available hard cover and kite. A lol game in the Ishizuchi, I kited 4 reds for an eventual game win, pulling them behind me around hard cover. Note: the bots almost never play 'smart' for caps, so a cap-point loss is rare if you're thinking. Don't try too hard to hold a cap as they'll even pass right through a cap too fast to capture it! Focus on staying alive and being devious, and just re-capture when/where as necessary. If I'm in a DD, staying alive is essential. It's all too easy to treat the bots as dumb, forgetting that they can still delete you -_- I focus on 'helping' my team delete the red DDs, then I can stealth/ambush torp to my heart's delight. Cruisers I'll tend to repeat my usual error (!) and get over-hungry, but when successful I'll be smacking targets left, right and all over BUT I'll always try to be on an outer edge of the melee with some available hard cover if needed (unless I've got torps that allow me to be more aggressive). In BB play I'm simply more cautious. The major threat is torps, and of course avoiding showing a side. It's good practice (given my usual tendencies) to have to remember to conserve my HP (same applies to DDs and cruisers). Consider all green botes as meat shields. Consider holding your fire or delaying your emergence from hard cover until the red bot has engaged your 'team mate'. Then watch red turrets carefully (especially those of the biggest threats) as the bots tend to swap targets serially. You can play with their timing - they've just shot at a team mate and their turrets are turning towards you - get into cover or use smoke now - and their turrets will 'commit' towards another of your team mates meaning that you can get back to the dakka-dakka. You can avoid a lot of damage this way. Most of the above is probably just common sense and standard principles (?) but an all-bot co-op game seems to give (me at least) more clear thinking time to put it into practice (and practice is good!). I'm definitely noticing that things I've started to think about more in these games is coming across into my random games. All of the above changes though when you've got a few/more no-bots on your team. Then it's back to a centre rush for kills and xp before the battle is over! GLHF
  6. Farlesquew

    CO-OP all bots

    I often get all-bot co-op games early in the morning and I too enjoy them. In randoms, I'll often have (fraught) expectations re what my team mates will do, but in an all-bot battle I know I'm on my own and thus my thinking is clearer. And from that I'm consciously learning things I've previously failed to appreciate. I'm thinking ahead more about where I'll be next and what any decision will result in (in terms of the larger context) and how I can deal with multiple targets (all too often I get tunnel vision in randoms, but in these battles I know I have to deal with everything). Thankfully many of the non-bots that occasionally get into these morning battles may as well be bots. Like the Huanghe who sailed a perfect half ellipse around the map this morning. His guns were tracking the lone red remaining (CV) but he couldn't be bothered firing (weird behaviour). Excellent, more xp for me!
  7. Farlesquew

    Price discrimination of Friesland

    Ok, so it's a barging-barge barging ship, shipping barging barges and barges?
  8. Farlesquew

    How's your French Event going?

    Finished the 3rd stage this morning. Surprised myself by completing the PanAsia misison despite only having a raw Gadjah-Madah as my highest in that line. Most of the heavy lifting was done by the Huanghe and Fushun in Newport scenarios (with flags and credit camos). Picked up the Guepard mission from a crate this evening. Thus: 10 crates to get the Jaguar mission, then another 12 crates to get the Guepard.
  9. Farlesquew

    Missouri with radar is OP

    Two days ago in a tier IX game with my Shiratsuyu. It's down to me and a Missouri against 4 reds. The reds still had a Minsk (on little life but it can still spot), and I'd forgotten the Missy had radar... then I see that radar circle spreading across the map and there's the Minsk and the mini map and my guns are bearing and there's the Minsk now fully visible and boom I kill it! Thank you RNGesus! Now it was 3 (2 BBs and a CA) against us 2. The Missy went on to nose tank all 3 remaining reds (2 BBs and a CA) for a surprising amount of time and kill one BB before going to down. I'm able to take out the remaining two using stealth torps with several minutes to spare. Hell of a good game by that Missy captain. The well timed radar was the turning point.
  10. Farlesquew

    When does content become too much?

    Yeah, I'm so deep into the French stage III (silly) grind that it's become a challenge that I'm now interested in completing, but it means I can't afford to play Ranked (yet), which is annoying. CB play 4 nights a week makes completing the French missions an even more risky decision, but I guess I've decided I'm prepared to lose out everywhere if I do (no Sirocco, no/little ranked). What I won't do is buy WGambling chests. Nope. I'll buy things where I know I'll get what I pay for; I will not spend money on the illusory 'chance' of receiving what I want.
  11. Farlesquew

    Losses, losses and more god damned losses

    I see from your stats that you've just reached tier V. That's the point at which you start to face players two tiers above you. Your learning curve just got steep. Relatively few players Seal Club in WoWS (compared to other games) as the economics aren't rewarding. But at tier V you're now suddenly meeting players with vastly more experience than those you've been playing against. People with thousands of games under their belts in many ships, national lines and types. Many will be playing tier V at the moment simply to help complete come missions from the current French DD event. It won't always be this harsh. And don't get too attached to the idea that you'll repeat those stats you managed in tiers II-IV. I.e., I was a mid-60s winrate player in WoTB, but here I just scrape into the bottom of the 50s. 49 ain't so bad once you realise that this game is 'balanced' differently from other games. Don't uninstall yet. Watch some youtubers and learn some more about some of the game's mechanics. Also, you've apparently played 99% of your games in German ships. From tier V the character of different national lines becomes more defined. Experienced players will be exploiting their ship's strengths and characteristics against the limitations of your German ships, while you've yet to learn much about you opponent's ships. Yep, the learning curve just got steeper, which makes the game interesting. Good luck and have fun.
  12. The concept of selling an entire line of ships to re-grind it grinds my gears. In WoT Blitz, when WG reset all of our equipment (equivalent to upgrades) and put it behind a MASSIVE grind, it was very much the beginning of the end for many of us. It's why I'm here now instead of there. It drained the joy out of that game for me. It would be silly to say I would leave because of the Research Bureau. But I can't imagine myself ever wanting to sell a line of ships for this idea, so it's a WG with ZERO value in it for me. Like my previous playstyle in WoT Blitz, I play across many tiers already; and I've got years of content ahead of me just finishing each existing line (and then the Italians, etc.). I just don't see the need for this Research Bureau.
  13. Farlesquew

    Another Idea for Research Bureau

    I also thought something similar. Let us keep our ships let us grind some new 'whatever' on each ship in a line to get the 'whatevers' required. That satisfies the grinders and encourages/rewards people playing all tiers. Do NOT require us to kill an entire line to participate. This is absolutely hell for clans who have 'enough' players to participate in Clan Wars, etc. (WoWS content) but will struggle and suffer if 1 or 2 players go down this 'kill line, regrind' path. The choice of 1 or 2 players will degrade the game play of another 5-6 players and negatively impact the esteem/enjoyment of entire clans. Think of you clan leaders, for crying out loud?! What do they get for all the effort involved in managing competitive involvement? They get to know they've done well and that their clan mates (hopefully) appreciate it. This Research Bureau idea smacks those leaders in the face by making their task thanklessly so much harder. For the record, I play across lots of tiers. I know that in a tier X I can't be up-tiered, but I play for the challenge and I'm not that primal about needing to get to end cap ASAP. If WG's 'real' motivation is to encourage play across more tiers, just spread out more events across a wider range of tiers. Want more low tier content ideas? Adapt the OP's method and reward players for playing a ship many times. In line with gaming's usual method of requiring double the points for each upgrade: 1. First time you grind enough xp so that you can 'research' the next ship in the line. 2. Now grind twice that amount of xp again and you get a permanent camo (with no buffs other than the base concealment/dispersion). 3. Now grind three times that amount of xp to get a permanent camo with the base buffs plus -5% service fee, +5% captain xp and +5% free xp per battle 4. Now grind four times that amount of xp and you get a permanent camo with the base buffs plus -10% service fee, +10% captain xp and +10% free xp per battle 5. Now grind five times that amount (because you don't have a life) and your permanent base camo has base buffs plus -15% service fee, +15% captain xp and +15% free xp. WG could adjust those figures as they like. It would potentially represent some very real reasons and rewards for players to play low tiers. And just signal/represent the number of times a player has 'upgraded' their ship with a flag or a painted ring on their gun barrels (one ring per upgrade) or a number signifier (1, 2, 3, etc.) after their ship name in the battle list (if that doesn't make the game program lose it's mind)? Note that the above buffs reward the player but don't give them competitive advantages (the game remains fair), but some form of signalling is required so that those with a need for recognition can get it and so that their opponents are given fair warning of the level of experience that they're up against. Or yeah, just go ahead with the current Research Bureau. Make us all get attached to our ships and then make us all sink them and start again. That just makes so much sense and 'oh boy' it sounds like so much fun...
  14. Farlesquew

    First French Container....

    Ditto, 8 crates, zero missions
  15. Farlesquew

    what T8s will you be taking into clan battles?

    The single BB spot is well catered for by other players on my team. Cruiser: I'm running my Edinburgh (19 points; set up with smoke as there's usually a Balt/Chap/Clev etc. on the team for radar). The concealment also makes it sort of like a second-ish DD on the team - some spotting, plus RN speed in a turn and smoke helps it disappear and escape when caught out in the open. DD: running a Cossack. If the reds make a mistake our team tends to be able to profit solidly, in which case the Cossack doesn't seem to lose anything because of the single torp launcher. When we're the team that makes a mistake... my one loan Cossack can only be in one place at a time and I doubt having more torps could turn the outcome I particularly like the concealment range on the Cossack as spotting the reds without being seen is a great way to 'help' them make that necessary nervous mistake
×