Jump to content

OdinAU

Member
  • Content Сount

    15
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    3173
  • Clan

    [R-A-N]

About OdinAU

  • Rank
    Lieutenant (junior grade)
  • Insignia

Recent Profile Visitors

202 profile views
  1. OdinAU

    Battleship Zao

    i think the appropriate term that would describe you is a bigot. and LOL that you think turning is "skill" your summary gives a good insight as to why youre so rude, youre delusional. i merely thought that at that range a cruiser shouldnt be able to negate 100% of the damage from a BB, i never said it should delete him or do significant damage. others have actually given evidence for their arguments and i respect that, you on the other hand have just raged like a child "youre wrong, im right" taking the discussion down a route not even related to the topic. bye bye, you wont be missed.
  2. OdinAU

    Battleship Zao

    thank you for your reply, i will check out this info some more. i do have to disagree about the yamato part though, yamato vs yamato is even as they can lolpen each other where as montana vs yamato is a one way street. so far as i can tell with my time played the most common T10 BB is easily the Yamato followed by the G.K then the Montana and when it comes to dealing with them the yamato will often score massive hits where no other BB could. i guess a lot of it is the wording, being not what ship is bad or good but what its capable of and in many situations the Yamato is more capable than the other 2 T10 BBs. the montana would prob have more use if CV were more common at that tier being thats where it stands out. i can see what you mean, im not the most experienced player but its harder to take someone seriously when they seem to do their best to insult you for no obvious reason. cheers
  3. OdinAU

    Battleship Zao

    all I'm saying is that if i manage to land a salvo on a CA it should take some damage, not negate it all in its entirety. people say the montana is bad because it can get bow penned by yamato and when everyone plays yamato that does put you at a disadvantage while the yamato player lolz as you lose 1/3 of your hp. an elephant could be and nimble as a mouse and its still the size of an elephant. same goes for G.K, its HUGE and will still eat torps....which is fine but i still think the belt should be better, yamato has 55% reduction vs G.K 27% thats a huge difference. i don't really care either way tbh, i prefer playing the Missouri to the G.K. you know everyone has the right to share their opinion, I've shared mine politely while you've just raged away, if you can't discuss things politely over a game without raging you have issues. LOUD NOISES! lol
  4. OdinAU

    Battleship Zao

    you're a charming one aren't you. no cruiser should be able to negate 100% damage from a battleship salvo at 12.5km PERIOD so far you haven't provided ANY reasoning against that. so how about instead of being so snobby you give some reasoning against that. so far as the G.K is concerned all I'm pointing out is that it has a horrible torpedo belt where it needs a better one, i never said you can't use "wasd hacks" i pointed out the fact that if a torpedo is in range of hydro and was aimed at you, you can't avoid taking torps, and yes in a BB in that situation you shouldn't be able to avoid every torp but you shouldn't take such a large amount of damage when your role requires you to subject yourself to that danger so often. oh well thats news, maybe you should inform the rest of the community that the yamato is the worst T10 BB and thats why 90% of T10BB's played are yamato. obviously its the worst because YOU say so.
  5. OdinAU

    Battleship Zao

    turning/changing speed when you see a BB fire isn't skill, esp when you have a captain skills that literally tell you when someone is aiming at you and when someone fires on you. about the only thing thats ever going to enter secondary range at T10 is another BB or a DD that screwed up, to get secondaries you have to sacrifice accuracy, something the german BBs are already bad with so either way you lose. while it might be the best at brawling, everyone knows that and they aren't going to let you close the distance are they... getting close to islands in a G.K comes with the risk of being ambushed by a DD, don't be stupid. and then you know what begs for torps? smoke, another brilliant idea for something that has the worst torp belt/manoeuvrability and is largest ship in the game. the guns are the only good thing it has left? what about the insane torpedo belt? or the fact its secondaries are basically on par with the german BBs, even if you ignore the crazy penetration capabilities of its guns on top of that theres also the amazing range/accuracy they have. G.K has only a small amount of extra HP vs the yamato while being considerably larger meaning it is a lot easier to hit by HE spammers, fire damage is percentage based which makes hp pool irrelevant. it also has a horrible torpedo belt while relying on closing the distance in order to be effective, this makes it extremely vulnerable to torpedoes. it has hydro but even if you can see them you can't avoid them. what this all means is its strength comes hand in hand with its biggest vulnerability. given all this i think I've made a fair case for the fact that if its acceptable for a yamato to lolpen any other BB regardless of angle then t10 BB should lolpen any cruiser like the zao, and they shouldn't be bouncing shells at 12.5km.
  6. OdinAU

    Battleship Zao

    so basically what you're saying is in that situation the Zao should be able to negate all damage from a battleship by angling, take over pens from superstructure hits while also being able to land salvos with HE that sometimes reach upwards of 8k damage on top of stupidly high fire chance? whats the point of using something like the G.K at that point then? isn't the whole selling point of a battleship its guns? HP doesn't mean much when fire damage is percentage based and you're so huge and slow you can't avoid anything. a yamato can lolpen just about anything and I'm talking about BB here so why can't the G.K do the same at the very least to a cruiser?
  7. OdinAU

    Battleship Zao

    So apparently a Zao can bounce/shatter 420mm salvos from a G.K when slightly angled, has less than half the reload time, high fire chance with 2-4k salvos with HE being pretty easy to come by, torps and stealth....but the G.K being a BB is supposed to counter that? while being a torp magnet with bad torp belt poor AA and horrible turn radius, the biggest ship in the game oh and theres those awesome AP bombs that are targeted specifically at german BBs? fun and engaging. sure there are games where you can do well in a G.K but with everything that counts against them, not really any fun at tier 9-10 worse at tier 8 seeing as its always MM with tier 10 games.
  8. so i just finished playing a round of ranked in my mutsu, and i noticed something weird. every single shot on CA overpened, which made me think why even bother shooting at them if i cant get decent damage. i had one instance which really pissed me off. cleveland full broadside at 12km nearly whole salvo lands and i get 3k damage. he should be deleted doing that and he even said he was willing to do it because he knew it would all overpen. so if battleships will just overpen CA like this how can you consider them an actual counter? am i just supposed to shoot at other battleships? that means literally everything is supposed to kill battleships while the battleships themselves are subject to long reload times, bad speed, turning, AA while apparently gaining the ability to kill off cruisers that show too much broadside at closer ranges. so why is there an overpen mechanic? if a CA is willing to show broadside to a battleship because he knows its safe, that has to be broken right? im not sure if im missing something or what but this really makes me think about quitting the game. it feels like everything is supposed to counter battleships while when playing as one youre subject to RNG while having no real benefits. as a CA you spam that many shells it doesnt matter, you use HE most of the time so if it shatters who cares because fires. DD gets long range torps and good concealment while BB gets shafted.
  9. OdinAU

    CV should be given seperate game mode

    what about low tier games then? where some ships literally have no AA at all, even without manual drop youre guaranteed 1-2 hits on something like a battleship even if it turns into the planes on approach with no risk at all, losing zero planes. in that case i dont think CV has a place in the game. different story where you can actually defend yourself. problem is cruisers that tend to have good AA will generally try to find an island somewhere to shoot over without being detected, not wait around for their battleships. players care about themselves only most of the time, they dont care about providing AA to the rest of their team. further more MM doesnt guarantee a cruiser with good AA in matches with CV. and then you have matches with multiple CV, what are you supposed to do when you get cross dropped? lose half your hp for no reason at all and wait for the dive bombers. from my point of view the game was designed like rock paper scissors yeah? BB counters CA CA counters DD DD counters BB. but then people can always work together as a perfect team right? so CA get HE to fire spam BB, DD get smoke and long range torps to use stealth to kill and then BB get that RNG where a good salvo can wipe out a CA. but then theres CV, they can spot dd so stealth is out the window. they can also cross drop them, BB basically get screwed here because theres nothing they can do if a CV wants them dead and their team leaves them behind leaving only the CA as a counter. and like ive mentioned before, not all CA have the AA to counter a CV for more than basic self defence. feel free to point out where im wrong.
  10. OdinAU

    "Special" upgrades

    Super containers are pretty hard to come by so when you do get one you want to at least get something you can use from them right? they would probably be fine if it wasnt for those "special upgrades" the only way they are special is the same way [content removed] except whats one too many is one of the "rewards" lets face it, every single "upgrade" is inferior to your other choices for upgrades.....WG even knows themselves theyre shit, they sell for 625,000 silver LOL. lets just look at that for a second here, say you open a credit container, you get 50,000 credits and sometimes flags ect that means you would need to open 12-13 credit containers to get what these "special upgrades" sell for...but the odds of getting a super container is maybe 1/60 if youre lucky...so where does that leave you? i hate to complain but these upgrades really do ruin what is a really cool system, am i alone in feeling like this? why not make it so the upgrades can also have a captian skill attached to it? or just remove them entirely i dont know, i just wanted to rant after getting 3 of these stupid things. Derogatory comments. Post edited, user sanctioned. ~amade
  11. OdinAU

    CV should be given seperate game mode

    i feel like given the right incentives it would bring life back to the CV class and maybe make people a bit more enthusiastic about playing them/with them, an easy way to see would be if WG released an event as a trial for it. thank you for sharing your opinion.
  12. OdinAU

    CV should be given seperate game mode

    constructive criticism* unless you would like to point out how it is not. obviously there is a reason for CV being in the state they are in right now, and so far every response has been hashing over what i already know. point being the reason they prob got nerfed into the ground is because a lot of players are annoyed by them...part of that is to do with the fact that your main counter to being attacked from CV is your own CV. if your own CV is bad then the WHOLE TEAM suffers. let me ask you this, if there was another game mode that offered higher rewards but was more challenging...obviously people who are more skilled and are at higher tiers would opt to play that mode yes? because grinding high tier ships takes a long time, if you added a game mode with CV and one without while buffing the CV in that mode then it would not only make CV play more worthwhile it would also provide an enviroment for higher skilled players and those learning the game. WG are always going to cater to the 99% and that wont change, so if you want better CV you need a solution....all im doing is giving my opinion on what that could be. and lets face it, if skilled players that know the game and are well versed in its mechanics WOULDNT play a game mode that is exactly the way it is now except with buffed CV to how they used to be, for higher rewards then maybe CV shouldnt be in the game at all.
  13. OdinAU

    CV should be given seperate game mode

    reason being i dont play WOWS to have a top down view of the game where its point and click. i agree with most of what youve said though, and the random factor is what makes it fun. i just feel like it was worth making the case for the ability to choose if you play with cv or not, i could see people going one of 2 ways that would improve the experience for them. being guaranteed a match with CV in which case AA spec and using catapult fighters vs spotting planes is a good choice or simply not wanting to play with CV at all and maybe having lesser rewards or something to that tune.
  14. OdinAU

    CV should be given seperate game mode

    yes i play tier 10, what i mean that spec in AA is a waste because most of the time there are no CV so AA spec= waste, if you dont however then you are underprotected vs CV attacks when there is one.
  15. Ive read a few post regarding this topic and after playing for awhile i feel like CV should be optional to play with. this game is based on your skill to position yourself and to aim effectively while supporting your team, you yourself play a part in the teams success but atm with games that actually do have CV the role they play is a lot higher. i.e if you have a poor cv your team is at a huge disadvantage and vice versa, if you have a good CV. Currently playing CV is a top down game where you point and click and how well you do basically comes down to how you manage your resources and understand how to combat the enemy CV. there needs to be a level of practice involved before CV players are given the ability to play in random pvp battles, i.e x number of co op games so they understand what to do. In order to have the slightest degree of protection vs CV attacks you need to upgrade your AA, given how hit or miss it is where there actually is a CV in the match youre either vunerable or sacrificing upgrades on slots you wont even use half the time. currently the CV is the only ship able to kill another craft in one strike in some cases with no possibility of harm coming to itself. 99% of games the CV will be the last to die with the highest chance of getting good kills, kills that 1/7 of the time shouldve gone to other players. you see CV are also great at scavenging, they look for ships that have already sustained damage so the resource they use on getting the kill is the lowest, understandable but its a thing, and it takes away from the other 99% usually low tier players trying to advance since thats where a lot of the CV players currently are. Then you look at the low tiers, where a good 80% of CV players are. where there is little to no AA available, this mixed with the fact most CV players wont go to the tiers where AA is actually effective and what you have is captians that have considerably more skill points than the rest of the players who are just learning the game. As the CV is unique in how it is played, its role and effects and where the majority of the CV players in terms of tier like to play i feel like they should either be removed or for there to be the option to select games either with or without CV. some players like the added factor of having to defend vs aircraft and thus they can then spec to have AA and be prepared, those players will also likely understand how to defend against CV attacks, in those games you could then buff the CV to where it was prior to the nerfs and give added rewards for the higher danger playing vs a skilled balanced CV. this way everyone wins. please comment with your ideas and thoughts as this is a discussion, do you think this is a viable option and would improve game experience or do you think this would detract from the overall game. should players have the option to customize their experience? apologies for the poor grammar, i wrote this fairly quickly.
×