Jump to content


  • Content Сount

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles



About InterconKW

  • Rank
    Lieutenant Commander
  • Insignia

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
    Not the bottom of Surigao Strait

Recent Profile Visitors

1,119 profile views
  1. InterconKW

    Game is becoming a JOKE!!!!!!!

    I frankly expect nothing from 75% of people I see in-game. Just because your allies are incompetent doesn't mean you yourself have to make plays that make you vulnerable to a worthless death too.
  2. InterconKW

    Game is becoming a JOKE!!!!!!!

    Never has my team abandoned my battleship so much as I failed to read the situation and was left behind in the retreat. It is a fundamental skill of BB play to react and position more preemptively than the rest. And remember what I said about pushing. Your perceived advantage in a push may not be what it seems to be.
  3. InterconKW

    Thank You

    Farewell, I hope you were an effective and informed player during your time here with good judgement, a winrate of over 45% to prove you always pulled your weight, and a pleasant attitude to all your allies.
  4. InterconKW

    Game is becoming a JOKE!!!!!!!

    I play all classes, but battleships and cruisers are probably my main classes, and battleships are my stronger line of the two. My primary high tier battleships are my Montana and Musashi, both with average damages exceeding 100000 and 1.2 and 1.4 kills per game respectively, and both exceeding 55% WR. This week out of all my games in these ships combined every one I survived earned a Dreadnought and all but 1 earned a fireproof. If you've "already lost half of your health only 2-3 minutes into the game", generally speaking you are playing it wrongly. There's a fine line between effective aggression and suicide and given the disdain for the so called "Camping BaBBy" less skilled players are starting to mistake the latter as a good thing and overvaluing it. When you push just for the sake of pushing you may find yourself under what is called "overwhelming fire" where multiple enemies can plant far more shells into your fat hull than it can take, even if you have a full tanking build. Even a bow-on Kurfurst won't last long when it burns from stem to stern. When you push into fights you can win or come under fire that you can sustain, that is effective aggression. Generally speaking, this involves wearing down the enemy from a neutral position or finding a hole in their formation that allows you to take out weaker enemies without coming under an overwhelming amount of fire, especially a crossfire. Second of all, if you are in a neutral second-line position in a battleship (which varies depending on situation but generally is with the cruisers but not quite on the front with the DDs or leading a charge) you may find yourself coming under varying amounts of fire as you stand out as the easiest target in a group. If you are able to position (a fundamental BB skill, by the way) this amount of damage will be very manageable. This is effective tanking. You draw fire away from your allies who might bring more utility to the team without losing your ability to fight. Third of all, things go wrong. Sometimes you will push into or sail past an unknown enemy that turns out to be too much to bear. This is why you exercise due caution. Don't go into a situation you cannot get out of. Plan some means of escaping beforehand, be it letting a fire burn on deck while you retreat, then triggering your damage control when you're far away enough to go into stealth (14km works on my T10 BBs) or just ducking behind terrain that will block some or all enemy fire and make your situation more manageable. I can't stress how much I hate a sub-45% win rate battleship that charges for the sake of charging, down a crossfired flank into impossible odds, then complains about a camping team or HE being overpowered. They're misled to think aggression is all people want to see and even may receive praise from the less capable community. While this is an extreme, I do hope you don't aim to be one of them. Incredibly rude and shortsighted judgement. Try to play a kiting cruiser and see how difficult it actually is to output effective damage all the time. Post Updated ~lengxv6
  5. InterconKW

    The Carrier Rework Kneejerk

    The issue of the "0.4s enlightened drop" was responded to within days of the outcry, as was the overperformance of first release IJN carriers, so I'd say an active attempt is being made. All this being said, I feel like it's more of a "check-and-damage-control-panic" than an organized style of finding and fixing issues.
  6. InterconKW

    The Carrier Rework Kneejerk

    People wanted an element of skill involved in AA, and we got it. However, there were an abundance of flaws and loopholes on both ends of the system to bypass AA and/or deal disproportionate damage which relates to how AA power is distributed, and sometimes shifting AA sector focus isn't even beneficial. Will it be fixed over time? I'll only say read the devblog. But how well is not within our control.
  7. Ok, this is going to sound horribly, horribly disorganized and my wording is probably going to be incorrect. Look at the forums. Look at external discussions. What's the first response you see on the carrier rework? "It sucks, _____ is broken, RTS was better..." ...really? Let's look at why. Is the general narrative logical, or is it grounded in emotion and an inability to adapt? The Bad I think I'm going to remind people about how... awful the state of pre-rework carriers was. The class was... zombified. Active good player numbers were in the two-digit range and the rest were terrible. Does anyone remember the shutdown effect of 788/9XX anchoring and AA divs? Does anyone remember a single player spreading 3 or more groups of squadrons and the spotting influence it had? The UI glitches? Does anyone remember how first getting into the class was impossible due to the high skill ceiling of low tier carriers when they still had alt-drop and when low tier clubbing in carriers was still viable? Or how the subsequent changes made low tier carriers almost dead while shifting the wall of harsh progression to T6 or T7? Was the class not so different in being an RTS that it was barely presentable to anyone to even make it appealing to pick up? Ironic that people would take refuge in the pre-rework carriers and throw all those complaints out the door suddenly when presented with a rework. Perhaps the vocal majority really did shift? Some of the reasons why are... not so glorious. - I don't know the new mechanics - I don't want to learn or adapt - I just don't want to see carriers at all Something along the lines of that. Let's be real. The World of Warships playerbase is not good at changing or learning. If people picked up things from experience failing to T10 with a 2000 game grind and a winrate of less than 45% wouldn't be something you witnessed daily. The same can be said for the carrier rework. Non-carrier players weren't used to seeing many CVs, had an inherent dislike for CVs (which is somewhat justified but sometimes taken irrationally over the line) and just took comfort in the "old" World of Warships where most games just didn't have a carrier at all, ignoring the occasional 1-in-5 or 1-in-10 that did, and those games that did have a carrier went... poorly. They took refuge in a "more comfortable" past. There's another group of people in the mix. People who tried carriers. A very small group of players was legitimately good in carriers. They went above and beyond, against the odds to succeed in a frankly screwed class. Yes, they may have benefited from its less desirable aspects, but for better or worse they sunk time and effort into RTS carriers, and it was taken away from them. I don't blame this group of players for their animosity towards the carrier rework, even if it's more emotional than objectively better. The (True) Ugly I have a... questionable reputation for fighting harshly for a CV rework. I predicted first person plane control features on the forums over a month before they were announced. I spent countless hours ranting over the issues plaguing the so-called "Most Hated Class" on the Reddit Discord and other WoWs communities and to be honest, the only conclusion turned out to be that people didn't really have one clear solution to fix the CV. And with that being said with the rework in swing... I'd be lying if I was satisfied at the end result. The problems were obvious from the get-go and I'm not in the best frame of mind to touch on them all. Radical changes hit one after the other, including the removal of ship control and odd-tier carriers. Then came the actual release. A clear showpiece would be the suffering of destroyers. The initial iteration of attack planes was not kind to them, neither were loopholes in the very different new mechanics like the (now presumably fixed) fearsome "0.4 second enlightened drop" caused by players discovering how bombs fell in the aiming circle. Even currently, it's visible how rare destroyers are becoming, and how much the carrier oppresses them. Apart from that, new AA mechanics have gone on a roller coaster, jumping between being totally useless to shoot down planes and being the Bermuda Triangle depending on who you ask, or what ship you used, or the skill of what player attacked you, or what version of the game you played (noticing how frequently such mechanics change with confusing redistribution of AA performance constantly underway). A truth is even beginning to surface that certain flight patterns mess with how flak bursts form, and you can almost totally negate the damage dealt by them, simultaneously as we are presented with cases of single flak bursts downing 9 planes at once. Imbalance? Look at the new 550k Hakuryu record as a prime example. tl;dr in brief the carrier rework was an unrefined mess. Primarily the issues we see are numerical disparities, or loopholes in the mechanics introduced en-masse, discovered and exploited by good players, but frankly not good for the health of the game. Wargaming was too optimistic, too ambitious in my opinion. They had a concept which had potential, but chose to add too much to it they were unable to handle in a manner that would be perceived well by players, while removing or limiting some things people liked, like covering allies effectively with fighters. I hope for the best, but fear the developers have a rough ride ahead of them. Kneejerk The negative response to the new carrier lies first in the rigidness of the playerbase, some of whom are justified, but others who are perhaps too entitled to their personal emotions, agendas or unwillingness to change and accept it. Combine it with a frankly very rough and unrefined introductory lap of sorts for the new carrier that frankly would put off anyone, and widespread negativity was unstoppable. But... it's not all a sad story. Think of what was actually achieved that got overlooked against the mess that ensued. The (Overlooked) Good The rework did, in fact, meet some of its objectives. -Carriers are more accessible now, and I like that. Yes, T4 CVs are weak, pitifully limited... but that sort of protects the immediately less-skilled from being hammered too hard with consequences, and anyone can get into them and with a bit of effort can find the inclination to pick up the class and develop the mechanical ability and game sense to use them. The style of gameplay is more inline with other classes. It is more presentable. -With that came new life for a dying class. CV population right now may be excessive especially with the premium sales in swing, but with correct balancing one can hope over time a healthy yet not top-heavy carrier population will form. -A lot of issues with the class were shifted, from something that was conceptually more challenging to something that could be fixed with numerical changes. This leaves potential for the issues to be fixed on a scale unlike before. -The performance and user interface is not flawless, but is better than before. At least I have not run into UI bugs on the same scale. -The immersion is better. You see plane maneuvers, you see strikes coming. -Is map coverage influence down? Yes, it is. -AA. Not perfect, far from perfect, I dare call it bad, but as a silver lining an element of skill has been added as desired, and that leaves potential for the future. Do I enjoy the new carriers more? This is just my opinion, but... yes. Maybe in the long term things will come crashing down just like the RTS carrier did. Or maybe it'll finally achieve the difficult task of shoehorning a type of ship that never stood near to the battle lines striking into fleet actions into a game that requires them to. I don't know, but with all due honesty the initial response is not the final truth.
  8. InterconKW

    Outer space = waste of space

    Do people fail to realize that April Fools/Halloween events are almost always testbeds for new gamemodes and mechanics? Scenario battles with shore installations, moving weather, the reload booster consumable etc. etc... do you remember when those were first tested?
  9. InterconKW

    3 Years of Warships

    27 March was the day of my account creation. I wasn't playing on that day, but I suppose today was quite a fitting day to open the last Wargaming Container, drop a day of premium and bring the wonderful Worcester into port. Come a long way, haven't we?
  10. First of all, welcome to the forums, @_Nelson. I personally think it is great when players come here to look for help and improve their gameplay. Second of all, keep in mind this is just my opinion based on how I would play a slow midtier BB. Basics: Improve with Experience. There are some things which are simply mechanical skill. I notice you tend to undershoot, especially on targets moving away from you at an angle or on fast cruisers. I won't fault you for this since you are fairly new. Just get used to reading the speed of your target and when dealing with angled ships pretend there is an oval on the plane of the ocean around your target that you should aim along, or whatever works. I already see you adjusting your aim on targets like the Phoenix, which is good. It will take some time and experience. Your setup: I highly advise running premium heal and damage control party, especially on New York which is very vulnerable to HE damage, unless you really cannot afford it. Game Sense: Tough but rewarding to learn. Truth be told, I feel like these might have been exceptional games for you. I'd like to see your average match to gauge your actual performance. A lot of your damage was concentrated to single lucky salvoes and you spent a lot of time being unable to engage. Your first game was a Standard Battle and your team held back and wore the enemy down, which is (simplified) the right thing to do in a Standard Battle. But this defensiveness does not mean you need to be out of effective range. Around the 18:00 mark you started falling back into the islands in spawn despite your team being in a fairly good front around your base, and this severely limited your ability to engage the enemy. Maybe being 1-2km closer (14-15km range?) would help without compromising your own survival. Positioning is very important in a slow BB and it is not forgiving to the inexperienced. In the second replay at 15:20 your team begins to push back into the enemy while you alone turn away. I don't fully agree to the team pushing, but you could have continued to move with them and it might have secured the northern flank. You would maintain the momentum of the game with little cost to yourself. I want you to note this disorganized push into 4 enemies or so gets a lot of your team killed, as does a similar attempt in the south- Learn to never rush into crossfires or overly defensive enemies like that. By the time you rejoined to start dealing effective damage beyond the first 33k or so your team had crumbled and the battle was all but lost. Game sense is difficult to pick up and many WoWs players lack it, even at T10. At its core, watch your map. Enlarge it if you have to (+). The map gives you information, even passively. For example if the enemy has 2 DDs and none are visible to you, but both were marked on the map at other times in the other flank, you have a lot more freedom of movement. Your reading of your team and enemy positions is a good metric on gauging when to push or hold back, and where to go. Primarily your goal is to stay in effective range without being focused- You don't want to be far ahead either. My last general criticism will be pertaining to target selection. I notice you often get fixated on the enemy BBs, presumably because when you misposition you struggle to hit other targets. Generally speaking, go for the ships that are either the biggest threat to the objective (there's no shame in shooting a DD which is the primary cap contester), the biggest threat to your team (eg. a cruiser supporting the enemy DD), or shoot a low HP target or one that is overextended from the rest of its team (put pressure on it if it is moving freely, or focus fire it so it dies faster- Removing enemy guns or spotting from battle is immensely valuable.) It's hard to explain things in words when the game is quite complex, so I'd also recommend watching good replays and paying attention to the map and decisions made in them. You also need to know your ship. Not every battleship is like New York. For example Kongo is faster and more resistant to HE fire and even AP when angled (so it can sometimes be more aggressive and move with cruisers) and other ships can vary (in stealth, speed, gun handling etc.) Assuming I'm free and not grinding credits or EXP, I may be able to div with you in the future to help, but this isn't a guarantee. I can also try sending you replays and explaining them. Good luck out there.
  11. InterconKW

    Tier X the Final destination and the end of my game.

    I have a feeling that this thread does not exactly being in off-topic, but I'll help regardless. To me, by design Tier 10 was the endgame, and you were not meant to simply sit at T10 and be profitable. If this were the case, the population would simply accumulate in top tier, and the community would become extremely divided. Take it as encouragement to grind other lines, and occasionally play your Tier 10 to enjoy being on top. This being said... You can make profit in T10 without spending any real money. I played my first odd 100 Zao games without a permacamo or premium account. Stack your signals and camouflage and don't play terribly- Credit earning depends mostly on your own performance, not just the team winning. For example if I had a Zao and was only doing.... 32000 damage per game average, which is not even equal to my base HP, I would be failing completely to pull my weight and racking up massive credit losses (as well as disadvantaging the team for a bad winrate overall). However, when my actual game was say... 90000 or so damage (and not just farming on battleships, mind you- I like to aim for good percentage damage on destroyers and cruisers to increase my impact), something you can quite easily achieve with any T10 cruiser, and I had the basic +20% credit signal, +10% credit camo and -10% servicing signal, I still pulled a small net gain. In fact, on average now with only basic modifiers, I make a net profit of an average of 50k in a Tier 9 cruiser like Seattle. I definitely think you can play high tier and make cash, or at least not lose a significant amount. You just need to hone your skills, do it well, and get the most out of your hard earned T10s.
  12. InterconKW

    I'm not apologizing

    You got that right.
  13. InterconKW

    No more Noob

    Everyone in World of Warships starts worse by default. In my first 3 months of gameplay at 300 battles I was sitting at 44% winrate. Discovering a statistic tracking site (asia.warships.today is down but wows-numbers works) gave me the harsh truth: I was bad. And because I knew I was bad, I tried to learn the game mechanics until I got to my current level of play- Feel free to check my performance. And to this day I still feel the drive to improve. But some people downplay that information. They ignore it. They put it aside. They think that stat sites shame them, instead of seeing them as resources to analyse. They blame the team every time even when at ~1500 games, their overall winrates aren't even 50... no, 48 or even below 45%. They pretend it isn't their fault that their average damage is only like 20000 despite having ships at tier 10. They spam their way through the game, tens of poor games per day, without the correct thought process. They may even lie to themselves that they are improving. They are a liability to every team they are on who gives the enemy more damage than they'll ever deal. I'm willing to bet that 75% of the playerbase doesn't understand the game properly or don't progress in skill level, and 67% do not have an approach to ever do so. If noone ever reaches out to them, 75% of the playerbase will bear the brunt of chat fury. Sometimes by genuine good players and sometimes by people as bad or worse than them. Sometimes it is justified, sometimes it is not. And this breeds a bad attitude- In times when genuine criticism is given, it is ignored. It's a vicious cycle. If you get called out often, see who does it. If they have credible play and overall performance, sometimes you might just find some worthwhile advice from them.
  14. InterconKW

    My first tier 10 ship :)

    Congratulations on your Yamato. Play it well.
  15. InterconKW

    believe me, 4 is a lucky number.....

    Quality content. ...and then an "ally" rams you cx