Sgt. Pepper

Verified Tanker [NA]
  • Content count

    318
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Sgt. Pepper

  • Rank
    Situationally Unaware

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    In a glass onion
  • Interests
    Playing TF2, listening to The Beatles, working with AutoCAD software
  • Server
    NA

Recent Profile Visitors

2,617 profile views
  1. That's for certain as well, however, it requires a complete overhaul, not minor tweaks to plane HP or AA DPS. My answer still remains that, with current mechanics, plane survivability does not need to increase.
  2. Well, the flipside of this is that they're completely ineffective at attacking a majority of Cruisers and all DDs. The GZ 1 is better than GZ 2, but GZ 1 still has a 2-3 second delay. It's not OP, but is broken. I watched a GK get one-shotted by a full squadron of those suckers with manual drop. All 100,000 HP. Whereas attacking DDs is basically pointless and took 1/4th of the DD's HP max? It's simply too effective versus some BBs and too ineffective versus all DDs.
  3. The short answer, plane survivability as a whole does not need to go up. Long answer, buffing plane HP is almost identical to nerfing AA. Planes live longer in AA to scout better, etc, but this time, CVs are impacted and strafing becomes even more important (as you need that DPS burst to kill healthier planes). My reply changes little to that, it's not needed. Also, the whole point of striking is through massed assaults. Sending your planes in 1 by 1 is a sure fire way to get them ctrl+clicked and killed. Literally that is the point. If you could trickle planes in 1 by 1 with your proposed HP buff, mass air attacks would be even more effective, as not only would the ctrl+clicked plane live, so would the other assaulting planes. Or at minimum, mass air attacks would still become even stronger. On a well related note (since this is a thread about the Graf Zeppelin): I'm willing to bet considerable money that WG implemented the super interesting ultra skill index MLG 6 second delay for "a unique carrier experience" because people like unique things on premiums like Saipan's weird 3-4 plane squads and Enterprise's (and now GZ's) AP bombers. I've read some recent changes to the GZ's AP bombs and heard feedback from people and they say the new iteration of them sucks because they're so hit or miss (like old WoT arty with huge alpha strike or no dmg).
  4. Well then, what would nerfing AA do? Buff a carrier's ability to scout better (you last longer in AA bubbles), strike better (you again last longer in AA bubbles so less planes go down before and after the strike) and sight denial becomes more CV focused (as AA matters less) which indirectly buffs better players. These are all things that do not need buffed, as you're basically buffing everything about CVs, not just one aspect. The fact of the matter is that the Graf Zeppelin is a weak ship and while nerfing AA will buff her, it buffs all CVs as a side effect, which plainly isnt needed. On a side note, please tone down the "I don't know what to say to you" as well, I'm trying to be polite and I don't think my arguments are unreasonable.
  5. You realize that nerfing AA would be a buff to all CVs right? A CV buff as a class is not needed either, considering they have the highest winrate in the whole game as a class... Side note: The Graf Zeppelin still kinda does need buffs, it's far too weak compared to the Shoukaku (by far the best CV in tier, but that's another story).
  6. I have found less enjoyment out of the game as I've kept playing. Why? No endgame content. "You've reached tier X, where all the excitement is? CW rewards are dead and getting into a clan that rewards any amount of gold is nigh impossible" Competitive scene is about as fucked as it gets. While this ties into endgame content and another point, it's big enough to matter. You can't really get into it easily, the game tries hard to keep players away from the scene, etc. WG has no idea where the direction of the game wants to go. I don't care how casual the game is or how competitive the game is. Tanks like the T26E5 and 252U get released, obviously catered towards casual players and whales to spend money on to get people to spend money and change tank lines to be flavor of the month so people spend copious amounts of free xp. On the other end of the scale, they release Ranked Battles (which already have stupid War Bonds tied to them) and spend millions of dollars on a competitive scene. WG just doesn't know what they want to do and so it looks unprofessional. Terrible balancing and flavor of the month bullshit. WTE-100, current Foch 155, old Foch 155, new Maus, tier X light tanks I found these factors to be greatly detrimental towards my urge to play. I can't rely on the tank I play being consistent, with WG taking broad sweeping changes to tanks. I can't be sure that I'm going to actually be able to earn gold from endgame content. I also can't be sure that I'm going to be able to see competitive changes or changes that would benefit casual players.
  7. After the WoT fiasco, I'm deciding to look away from the game and instead take a look at other games, specifically this one. I was looking at the ranked battles thread, and it looks like tier 6 is going to be selected for ranked. So, my question. What boats are worth going for at tier 6 for ranked? I know for certain I'm going to be grinding the IJN CAs, USN DDs and KM BBs for a varied group of boats, but are there any tier 6s that are notable? Can we even get a tier 6 ranking @OnboardG1?
  8. Yeah, I had difficulty describing the situation. I knew that it was close to pay 2 win, but wasn't quite. It isn't quite pay-to-play either, as the IS-3 exists, and armor tends to uptier poorly so higher tiers kick the shit out of the 252U and Liberte. I figured that was the best term to use because they are easy tanks to play and win with.
  9. TIL that Casual Purple was actually just a section for drama. (Placing this here to be in the same place as the rest of the drama) So, recent developments in the SirFoch situation/FochGate (not my preferred term since Watergate was very different) lead us to WG EU and WG NA releasing the same statement. Said statement here. (EU site) MORE IMPORTANTLY a statement was released regarding the strong premiums and recent P2W elements. WG Staff: "We will provide answers regarding the questions surrounding World of Tanks becoming P2W and the Premium T8 situation during the Grand Finals. We will make sure that the communication is properly distributed and we're working on an open Q&A for those who won't be joining the Grand Finals." These links and quotes were found courtesy of Baarn on the wotlabs Discord. Here's to the second victory the playerbase has had, first being the Rubicon patch!
  10. I see what you're talking about now and I feel that's a justified opinion, however, I feel like I want to believe that they felt it was offensive, even though it was likely a stunt to censor bad press. They probably weren't concerned about protecting their employees, but I'd like to believe that.
  11. From what I understand of YT copyright strikes, it would be very easy for WG to go after him on youtube. SEGA has done it before, and youtube tends to lean towards developers on if a strike should go through. Now, this doesn't mean WG would be clear on the PR perspective (and SEGA certainly wasn't), but they could still do it.
  12. Your 1st sentence in the second paragraph especially I have trouble understanding because of the grammatical errors. I understand english may not be your main language, however I can't understand you if your sentence doesn't make sense. I'll respond to the latter half of the message that I think I understand. I'm trying to say that WG stated that the video was to be removed on the grounds that it was offensive to WG employees. Now, I don't care if it was. But this is technically what WG declared as the basis for the calling of the removal of the video. Basically, WG's logic behind the removal was that the video was offensive to WG employees. That was what WG said about their own logic and I would assume that a person can explain their logic behind an action, thus why I believe we should trust that WG's grounds for removal of the video was being offensive to WG employees. I think you got confused about what I was trying to communicate, but I'm not sure.
  13. There's literally a thread already open. Go, shoo. I just found it utilizing the (albeit hit-or-miss) search function. But it's there. So go.
  14. So, the common misconception with Jews is that they're greedy and/or stingy. Thus, it's become sort of an insult. Wargaming is greedy, thus why Rollercoaster called them "Jewgaming". To be fair, it's true, WG is greedy and moneygrubbing. Nothing against Jews, just poking them like we wish for all arty players to get cancer. We don't actually want them to get cancer, but since arty is really frustrating, we use the term. TL; DR: Get your panties out of a wad, he was pointing fun at WG being greedy.
  15. It's better to try now than when everyone doesn't care. Now is the single best time to lash out and try and get something to change.