Jump to content

Flashp0int

Players
  • Content Сount

    9
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    5557
  • Clan

    [ARGH_]

About Flashp0int

  • Rank
    Seaman
  • Insignia
    [ARGH_]

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Switzerland
  • Interests
    Marketing, game development, strategy and tactics.

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Flashp0int

    0.8.0 PTS - General Feedback

    +1 completely agree Please let's stop looking at "planes attacks on ships" alone. The influence of a CV over the game is still huge because the CV is basically immune for about half the game or the potential DPM needs to be the lowest of all ships by far (low risk - low reward). Btw, I also agree with Flamu comment. A fully AA speced DD should be able to reach a CV and threaten it. Imho, you need was to threaten the CV much more (more risk) and you need to lower their impact (less reward). A good Cruiser, BB or DD should have a fair chance to get a CV. Hence suggestions: Finite number of planes, chosen like you choose WoT ammunition (for instance: Hiryu had 64 planes usually 21 Mitsubishi zero, 18 Aichi, 18 Nakajima and reserves). Let the player choose their mix of fighters (the area system works, but should be based on the numbers of fighters), then TorpB, Bomber, Rocket. That is all they get. (which means that Flamu's scenario where he is constantly hit with Rockets would not work as well without making huge compromises) Low DPM, because of high survivability of CV TorpB, Bomber and Rocket cannot spot or are very bad at it. You could add a reconnaissance squadron that would be good at spotting. But as a choice, either the CV spots, or he does DPM. I would really encourage to consider that BBs and CVs with reconnaissance aircraft get a consumable to chase squadrons and spot CVs (like a radar effective against CVs), that you can only action while a squadron is close.
  2. Flashp0int

    0.8.0 PTS - General Feedback

    Lets say I am suggesting to go even further on the rock-scissor-paper approach. Torps would be ineffective against DDs. Rockest would not affect HPs, but systems. Bombs would be your Damage over time (burn). I disagree, the RTS CV has something to loose because it has a finite number of airplanes for the whole game. Means that you can pretty much say that the CV health = airplane pool. Because once it is gone he is sort of done. Again, I disagree. While you can loose planes in a squadron. The version I tested you had as many airplanes as you want. Sure, there is a small scramble delay. But nowhere like rearming torps. Sure there are games where you can have bubbles and short immune. But nothing like 10+ minutes in a 25 min match. Or I have never played any of these. Competitive games need to a balance between taking damage and damage output. Hence if you have a very high damage mitigate (the CV has high mitigation because of damage evasion), you cannot have also a very high DPM, a very high team support and so on. I have made suggestions in my initial post: Finite number of planes (the number of plane is the CV health) Lower DPM because of high survivability No spotting while doing damage, it is either-or CC and BBs airplanes can chase squadrons and reveal CV position to open a retaliation opportunity like a radar does
  3. Flashp0int

    0.8.0 PTS - General Feedback

    Sorry, but what is balanced? You cannot retaliate. The CV does not even risk anything. Only the attacked can loose something. If you put a CV and another ship on a map. The CV wins. Because he can hit the other without consequence. But I get your point. You saying that there is a fair chance to mitigate an attack. The issue I see is that the CV can inflict 3k 12-20 times before the victim can do anything to retaliate. At least when DDs stealth top you, you have an idea where they are, you can maneuver to make them less effective. The tactical thing about the attack mitigate is for me what it is, a tactical game balancing. The CV game issue is nuts. It is like allowing World of Tank artillery to have map awareness on top of shooting anywhere or have a league of legend match where one wizard is invisible but can still damage anybody on the map
  4. Flashp0int

    0.8.0 PTS - General Feedback

    Yes, hence the IJN torps who are good at engaging anything could be deep-water imho. So you have the slow US torps that agile targets should be able to out-manoeuver and the other ones that simply cannot hit DDs. These are just suggestions to make it more rock-scissor-paper and make choice important, while CV mostly impact on the long term versus short term.
  5. Flashp0int

    0.8.0 PTS - General Feedback

    Watched several YouTube videos and did some tests with friends. I’ll comment on the tactical issues later. But first the bigger picture: The reason the CV is so dominant in battles (now and in the future), is that it is in essence capable of striking anywhere while being totally immune to retaliation for a very long time (like past mid game). Think of it comparatively,.. BB are visible through the map as soon as they shoot for 20 seconds. It is difficult for them to hide. Cruisers might be able to hide somewhat to mitigate risk (positioning for US, smoke for UK, speed for France, maneuver for Japan), but in exchange they are more fragile. But they get spotted too and need to move closer. Destroyers have to go to frontline, they are stealthy and can work as class canons. But they are countered through sonar, radar, RPF and punished very hard if spotted. CV,.. they can stay unspotted for a very very long time. While being able to harvest damage without risk. They are a huge pain for destroyers just because they spot them. Would you really like to play Battlefield with an off-map artillery player capable of shooting anywhere? Why would destroyers and cruisers be the only ones who can be the first kill? Why would the guy at the back have the most tools and most power? There is something really weird with the risk-reward on that one. With the old/current system, at least the plane pool was the CV HP pool. Once the planes where gone, he was of no use. This means that the CV had to actively plan a risk-reward situation all the time. But that is gone with the new system. I see no situation not being very frustrating with having this form of immunity. AA is basically like angling to mitigate a unilateral attack. But you have no way to retaliate. Given the CV immunity,.. I see a lot of comments that are tactical. Focusing on a torp drop or a few seconds of AA. But I think the game needs to be thought in a more rock-scissor-paper way. The CV being also guaranteed to last through at least half the battle. It should have a lower "DPM" than less safe ships. Hence it needs to be either, some planes need to be good at some things and very bad for others. Torpedoes bombers – historically destroyers matched the speed of torpedoes. Hence why not make them close to DD speed. Others bombers could use deep water torpedoes that might go slightly faster. The torpedoes would be the highest damage output, but totally ineffective against destroyers. Rockets – would be used to deactivate systems on others ships but do very little damage. When using these, the CV tries to do crowd-control in MMORPG terminology. It should be highly effective against rudder, removing AA positions, secondaries and so on. Potentially even putting sonar or radar on a cool down. It should be effective against DDs and Cruisers, in order to assist the team. Dive-bombers - could be less exposed to AA, ideal for static cruisers hiding behind islands or targets going straight. It should also be the ideal tool to put other CVs decks out-of-order for some time (like a destroyed turret for ships). It should be a bad choice against ships that are nimble. Reconnaissance – the choice in order to spot other ships for some time. Primary anti-DD tool where you just enable others damage DDs. Which also means the other planes should be bad for spotting. As you probably understood, I am suggesting that DDs would be a CV nightmare if they come through, like or even worse than they are today. In order to stimulate that rock-scissor-paper gameplay. On top, I would recommend that cruisers and battleships with spotter planes could send their spotter plane to spot the CV after they send a squadron after them. So if you have a spotter/fighter and your AA just shot planes, you get an opportunity to send a pursuit aircraft. It will follow the squadron, spot the CV for some time (like a radar would), allowing to know exactly where it is and allowing for some long range shooting for a few seconds. This is the retaliation part that is missing. Last but not least, either the numbers of planes need to be limited (and defined before battle, same as WoT ammunitions (AP, HE, Gold) or there should be draw back to sending squadrons to certain death. An interesting way of doing that could be borrowed from the scenarios. CVs would have a limited plane pool, but would be able to replenish planes near a logistic ship that they can summon and have to meet somewhere on the map. The good player should hopefully never need the logistic ship.
  6. Flashp0int

    Ranked Battles Season 10

    until

    I usually like Ranked. But not a big fan of T10 ranked. But to be transparent, I do not like Ranked for it's competitive component. I like it for its collaborative. Usually, half-way through the season, Ranked becomes selfish and salty. That's usually the signal that it is time to leave. Why not stick until Rank 1? Because it is a huge time investment (which is difficult when you have a job, family and friends), even with a 100% win rate I would probably not play enough battles to get there. The second reason is that I prefer to play with friends, so as soon as they hop on Discord we play Divisions and not Ranked. What is great about ranked? Ranked allows us to discover lower tier ships in more even playfield. Not facing enemies either way more poweful or way less powerful. One of my preferred was the T6 ranked for instance. But 5, 7, 8 and 9 all have interesting potential. You could perfectly have more tiers being used through ranked. T10 are ships we face a lot while grinding 8 and 9, so happy to see other ships as well. I agree that games with CVs are problematic. The team with the best CV wins in a way that has little to do with the rest of the team.
  7. Flashp0int

    General Feedback

    I see a lot of doubts and concerns about the new USN light cruisers in current YouTube videos. Challenges: USN light cruiser do not have the same mitigation as other light cruiser (smoke, repair, long range). They rely on island hugging. Well, I really like this. But, I agree that you could use some balance. What about a unique consumable that plays exactly with this type of gameplay? Disembark Marines / Ground support IF less than 1 km from an island (simply detect a possible collision, this already exists as a function) USN cruisers can disembark ground forces (special consumable). Lasts as long as close to the island and speed less than 12 knots, but if moves away, it takes a long time to recharge. Grants: Spotting (like an airplane, but slightly less efficient. Advantage is that you know if something lurks close), further reduced detection range, repair consumable refreshes faster (this is your additional damage mitigation). I am an Island If completely static next to an island, the USN light cruiser can hide from radar. For as long as not spotted by any other mean. Then long refresh cycle. Grants: Cannot be detected by radar Silent operations Within a few seconds, stop machines and gets silent. Grants: Vastly reduces sonar detectability These would completely work along the island hugging concept of the ships. It would also mean that USN light cruiser are very static and enemy should really get them to move in order to have them loose their Ground Support benefits. Silent operations and I am an island would allow them to further create surprises while aligned with their static approach.
  8. Flashp0int

    End of Year Achievement Marathon!

    Tin can - Opening 17 containers if I am not mistaken
×