World of Warships – Ships & Giggles 34

2,546 views
1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (156 votes, average: 4.97 out of 5)
Loading...

Happy Father’s !

30 Comments:

  1. AH, somebody else noted the SHira gun sound issue … I reported in the bug report forum. I don’t have Ultra sound selected, so it’s not from there … I guess we are the only 2 people still playing the Shira 🙂

  2. I think french, german and IJN Cruiser are just fine, and not weak at all even without radar

    • In a ship to ship fight, yes, but they can’t relay information to the rest of the team like a 11.7km radar from a Moskva can or a 56 second 9.9km radar from a DM can. They can’t sit at a cap and deny it outright with their radar. The more radar that enters the game the more specific the role the ships without radar play which makes balancing the ships much, much more difficult.

      You rely on your team a massive amount in this game. Next time it’s towards the end of the game and you’re losing and just need a radar to reveal an enemy DD that’s starting to run away after popping smoke tell me you won’t look at the Zao next to you and think “damn, wish you were a Des Moines”

  3. You want to make Japanese DDs playable again? Give them flashless powder shells. The IJN historically had shells between 3-6in that could be fired with no flash. For every shell fired the DDs detection radius increases by 0.2km and have the normal cooldown till being undetected again.

  4. Make radar line of sight like real life.

  5. Italian cruisers are unplayable without radar? Did you really think out that answer because it seems like a real stretch to me. Seriously if radar is a must have for a ship to make it worth playing then well… it really is not worth playing! Fact of the matter is up until this bullshit radar feast that is going on I used to love to play DDs and now I have garaged them. Granted I may just be blowing it out of proportion and just need to learn a new way of playing but seriously, radar in this game penetrates solid rock for fuck sake! I mean we cant even apply logic to this but the whole idea of so many ships having radar and there is not even a close counter to it is bullshit and you can defend it all you want with lame as excuses like no one is going to play the Italian ships without it, I mean seriously give me a fucking break!

    • Kevin Morrison what nonsense are you talking about. B6 wasn’t defending radar at all. He was pointing out a trend. To make a ship desirable wg has a bad habit of saying “oh we’ll just slap radar on it”.

    • Thanks for the recap Vekta, yea it was hard to pick that out but it did sound like he was referencing what some moron had to say as an excuse for why radar was critical on Italian cruisers. So I stand corrected and about all I will do is redirect that statement to any idiot that wants to make this observation as legitimate cause for having to have radar on something! All we have to do is look at the Cleveland as an example, it was a cruiser with a clear role and now that they put radar on it we see every dumbass and their mother playing it like it is something it is clearly NOT! I am enjoying the easy kills I am getting and racking up quite a long list of stickers for Clevelands as of late because of it…;)

  6. FrustratedNameSearch

    RADAR is destroying the game play in WoWs. It’s got me wanting to sell all my DD’s and use the cash for something else.

  7. Dam how fast are those HSF torps?

  8. Terry Hollenbaugh

    Nice replay Business6, Nice to see ya again

  9. I would love if radar A. Did not go through islands and B. was related to ship height or class so a Des can radar a conqueror at 15km but a DD at 8 sort of thing.

  10. Still not entirely convinced that radar is a must have feature. I think it’s more to do with folks upping their Cleveland xp to unlock the Tier IX when it gets released, and the consequence of that is that you’re seeing 4-8 Clevelands in any match where there’s Tier VIII cruisers.

    As in the past whenever a line of ships is reworked or added – everyone and his brother are playing them. After the first few months the ship population normalizes, until the next time.

    • I’m not seeing that many Clevelands. I’m seeing that many DMs, Moskvas, Donskois, Buffalo, etc. Throw increasingly frequent carrier matches into the mix and it creates a team dependency that’s absolutely unrealistic and unfair for a destroyer to be expected to do much of anything unless it’s a gunboat. And to top it off you get absolutely *nothing* for spotted ships, spotted torps, spotting damage, etc.

  11. That DD ram at the beginning – could have been the BB’s doing. I did something like that a while back; a New Orleans was chasing my NC and peppering me with HE, setting me on fire constantly. He got so close I just slammed on the brakes, and before he could avoid it he rammed me and died. Problem solved.

  12. Completely agree with you on RADAR.  Radar should be sort of a snapshot of what’s around and not a device to bend over DDs.  Maybe a couple of more RADARs and <10 second duration?

  13. Risheen Mukherjee

    Just make radar and hydro LOS. Or atleast, if they have to pass through an island, make it so that the player has to compromise. Like a 9.9km radar on open sea is 4.9km when through an island? That way the radar user cant actually bring his guns to use and rather has to depend on his team to attack the DD, and it also means DDs cant just camp behind islands. Like I said, a compromise for both.
    Also, have you played the Republique? I thought it was a great ship.

  14. i loved my Kagero, until they went “overboard” with radar recently, i mean the radar is ok kind of, but way to many ship now have it, and for the Kagero with its 10km tops, you cant even get close enough to send some torps, before you be deleted, so i went on to the yugomo and its fun playing again ( w/ 12km torps ), at least you get a chance to be useful for your team and get some dmg points yourself

  15. That Kurfurst Rush. Still awesome 2nd 3rd and 4th times
    Such a shame it wasn’t a win in the end. Deserved it.

    • Losing matches like that shows the importance of pushing and focusing DDs. If anyone learned from that loss then I’m ok with losing it if it helps reduce the likelihood of it happening the next time around.

  16. I think the better way to go would be to make torpedoes less *completely devastating* first, then make it easier for the DDs to land their torps… because right now, any cruiser that eats a torpedo is going to lose at minimum a third of it’s HP, assuming it came from an IJN DD. Even worse is the ridiculous decision to make torp hits to the torpedo belt count as citadel damage while bow hits are repairable like normal damage. Reverse that, lower torpedo raw damage, then pump up the torp reloads and reduce the concealment and such.

    Even then though… torps will always be an anti-idiot weapon. Against anyone who knows what they’re doing, you’re fighting an uphill battle to land torps on them, due to their very nature. It’s pretty difficult to make that work any other way.

    • Interesting ideas. The suggestion that torpedo damage should be reduced in lieu of other changes that would simply allow them to hit a little more often is a good one but the first thing that would be said to counter that would be that the German DDs basically have that as a national flavor. Their torps are crap in regards to damage but they get them off incredibly fast.

  17. Thanks Biz! Great stuff – (Beatty_10)

  18. Most ships have 2 or 3 radars per ship, 3 or 4 with premium..
    Change this to just 1 across the entire game, 2 with premium.
    This will encourage radar to be used less in game, encourage more skill in applying, as it is now, with 3 radar ships on a team, you can chain radars for the entire 20 mins.

  19. Another great episode Business! I agree completly on everything you said about modules and radar. I really hope the upcoming radar ships will amplify the problem to the point where they can’t ignore it anymore.

  20. I remember that from the stream

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *