Community - Forum - View old data

Categories :  

General Discussion

  Index

  • comparison of nations, and need for re-balancing

    10. 27. 2005 04:49

scudder
I did an exhuastive comparison of nations, and here's how it turns out.

The Brits have the worst torpedos. Torpedos are 99% of the game, it's THE way to get
experience and levels.

Thus the Brits should be compensated with armour or better gun damage or another support
slot, or something.



LOL ok tongue removed from cheek, when you see these UKBB vs USABB vs JAPBB vs GERBB,
don't you wonder how the hell a UK player is going to get to that high a level?

You still see Germans and Americans and Japs playing in their DESTROYERS when they have 3
bars! British players grind their way from one mediocre ship to the next, and it's not
easy. It's slow, slow, slow, and slow. If you want to compare stuff compare level 80BBs of
other nations to level 60BBs of the UK, because that's how it is. There is no way for the
UK to get massive exp quickly, because we have to get it by shooting and sinking 1 ship at
a time.



I now return you to the complaint-fest already in progress, where you will hear why the UK
is completely superior to everything else. In theory. Even though the EVIDENCE shows that
the high level players got there in USA and GERMAN and JAPANESE ships.


edit:
BTW I'm not actually suggesting any changes, to clear that up. I like the Brits, I like
shooting stuff, and I don't care if it's slower, imo it's funner.

So please get off our cases, stop trying to vote for Brit ships to be molested!
  Index

  • Re : comparison of nations, and need for re-balancing

    10. 27. 2005 13:28

ixal
Velius, your formula is flawed. You asume that numbers can be picked multiple times and
that the order matters which isn't the case.

The real formula is 1/((45*44*43*42*41*40)/720) = 1 to 8.145.060

  • Re : comparison of nations, and need for re-balancing

    10. 27. 2005 13:25

andrew
Um, I hope you're joking. Most BB's are British, in case you haven't noticed. Seen a lot
of Nelsons around? Revenges? A few PoW's and KGV's and QE's? Yes, you have. You might not
see the high level british players in All Welcomes a lot, because they get more experience
in CL/CA/BB rooms, just like me in my M Pro. They don't get bombed or swarmed there. And
torps aren't the way to go, you know. KM torps SUCK. Yes, it's possible to TW in a Z
destroyer, but past that they're useless. In fact, any torps past our first set are WORSE.
But you shouldn't be concentrating on torps. Because any self-respecting player that's not
going IJN torp line uses AA past DD level. The Brits get best/lightest armor,
highest-damage guns, don't get much of a speed drop, and get range only barely short of KM
at higher levels.

  • Re : comparison of nations, and need for re-balancing

    10. 27. 2005 12:42

otangryguy
UK has the strongest early game fleet of any nation I've played. It's the only nation I
hit 2 bars in less 100 battles WITHOUT OP Convoy

  • Re : comparison of nations, and need for re-balancing

    10. 27. 2005 10:19

yourshepherd
Velius, this subject is far too complicated. We're still working on determining what
no DD means. Moreover, the lottery system is great in my opinion. It allows people
to post absolute crap and then say "i was just doing it for exp" I'm not really this
completely retarded. It's another mask for the community to wear.

  • Re : comparison of nations, and need for re-balancing

    10. 27. 2005 10:01

velius
1/(1/45)^6 = 1/8303765625.00, or 1/8.3 billion. With 1000 people trying it's 1 in 8.3
million, and assuming that the number is held fixed, it would take roughly 16 years
at 1000 attempts every minute to try every possible combination.

  • Re : comparison of nations, and need for re-balancing

    10. 27. 2005 09:35

ixal
Its 8 million, not 8 billion.

And when 1000 people play the lottery it would take 52 years for someone to win.

  • Re : comparison of nations, and need for re-balancing

    10. 27. 2005 09:20

velius
I don't understand why people care about this lottery. The odds as they stand are
roughly 1 in 8 billion that you'll have the right number. With the size of our
community, and the requirement of 50 posts per attempt, even if they ran it every
minute with each ticket being reusable it would likely take years for a winner. So
why try and up your post count?

  • Re : comparison of nations, and need for re-balancing

    10. 27. 2005 08:22

Scudder
:)

I'll let the secret out, I need forum points to buy lottery tickets for today's draw.

But still, I see thread after thread telling the NF crew to destroy British ships, and it
scares me! Come on, you would be scared too if you saw it being said about your shps.

So the only way to kill 2 birds with 1 stone is to go on counter-offensive. Might have to
make more forum points for next lottery by creating a petition to nerf some other nation:)

Or everyone on the forum could call a truce, and let NF decide what is balanced.

Yea, I didn't think you'd go for that either.

  • Re : comparison of nations, and need for re-balancing

    10. 27. 2005 07:24

carmelo
LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL
LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL
LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL
LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL
LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL
LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL
LOL LOL LOL LOL


No honestly..... LOL. Someone should enter this post in the Screen Shot contest. I'd
vote for it.

  • Re : comparison of nations, and need for re-balancing

    10. 27. 2005 07:21

velius
Okay. So your point is that british destroyers and CLs 'aren't as good as other
nations', but I'm not sure what you are intending to do about it.

My take is this. The Q and tribal were among the best destroyers pre-new DDs. Able
to fit a good amount of armor, and a large amount of firepower, while
simultaneously having a small profile, they were very irritating to fight. Especially Qs
with single 6s going against CLs.

With the new DDs, yes, the brits have the short end of the stick to some degree.
The Z99 and DDX both are better ships then the L class most likely. At least until the
L gets access to the 2x6" guns at level 33, which I agree is too late to make a
difference early game.

As far as CLs go, the Dido and Sirius are hardly 'bad', particularly the later. With 5
2x6" guns, the Sirius certainly has more firepower then the CL1s of every other
nation except the US, which combined with its extremely large amount of armor
makes it a serious threat. And since brits are in CLs until what, level 42? It's hardly
the end of the world. Once you get a York or County with the early 8s that brits get,
you're set.

The hardest point to play UK is early game. You don't have money for your uber
armor, your support hasn't gotten to the point it does anything, and you've got low
range and low damage guns. Once you get a CL, your superior armor, support, and
guns all come into play, and the UK becomes the most powerful nation in the game.

And I would say the fact that you see 3 bars in destroyers for other nations is a
point against yours; namely that there are no higher level ships that are worth
using. For UK, all the CAs are good, and so are most of the BCs and BBs. The
Renown is the only real exception to that, and even it can pack enough armor to
hold its own against equal level ships. It's only when you take a Repulse or Renown
and pit them against higher level BCs and BBs that their weakness shows. And
that's the case for pretty much every ship in the game.

edit: Oh yeah, no way for UK ships to get xp quickly. Try getting a nelson and killing
EVERYTHING that gets into range of you in 1-3 shots. 16k per salvo baby, all
concentrated into a pixel of death. Or get a York, and blockshot with its 3x8s at level
50. 6-8k per salvo, ignoring armor. Not too bad either. It might take a little longer to
get to the York, but once you get there you level faster than anyone else.
1 2