1MajorKoenig

22.000 Battles und so eine Frage... DDs - JA, wesentlich einfacher in T10 und BBs auch (nicht mit alles aber mit den meisten). CAs eher nicht. Aber dann diese saudumme Einleitung... als ob DD fahren jetzt so schwierig wäre. Hello Igno

Nein

I think it is none of your business where I spend my time and why. As for the rest: we certainly disagree on certain aspects but I am far too drunk to argue right now (plus the weather is far to great to be inside). As for the suggestion to learn from Elazer - probably a wise idea if he is indeed doing such things

I think we have some different opinions on certain matters for sure. However this is what “discussions” are about as long as it stays constructive. And as long as we are all still aiming at an overall “fair” state for the game

Are you seriously stating that T4 CVs are balanced? Or was that a typo and you meant “balans’d”? There is no single reason to play T4 CVs. They deal almost no damage and don’t have any other notable strength either. Any other T4 ship has more impact. I wouldn’t call “useless” = “balanced”. I can see why WG wanted T4 CVs grossly underpowered but that’s about it.

+1 (mehr schreibe ich gerade nicht dazu, sonst wiederhole ich mich da nur)

You are mixing up two points in my opinion. First - it was an incredible stupid idea to release premium CVs. Based on what should they be balanced? In an unstable meta, a learning playerbase And And And it was impossible to create anything reasonable. Results can be seen. Big E grossly overpowered, GZ useless and Kaga crap, Saipan so so. Good Job, balancing department. 0.5 / 4 balanced. But that aside - the CV game needs to look at how the playerbase is getting along with them. It doesn’t help if WG would balance around a small group of good players leaving the rest in the rain. You admitted that group is rather small. I disagree any other class has a particular skill problem. Sure there are terrible players in each class and there is a big bunch of average players and a small amount of really good players. But none of the classes - except CVs - has a problem with the “average” doing ok or better. From where we are WG can easily into two different directions: 1) make CV play harder thus putting off average and new players and likely ending up in the same mess we are coming from or 2) make CV play more accessible - meaning less hard in most cases. This would naturally result in better results for decent players hence why this would need to go hand in hand with reducing some of the potential a CV has and potentially closing some of the exploits

Same here. And considering it is still 25€ per ship it clearly isn’t worth it. I could hope for Terrine and Kidd but I could also end up with Irian and Wichita which are of 0 value for me. So nope. Another pass

If citadels are well possible a reduction in alpha is an option. Doesn’t need to be 1/3 but you could try 2/3. Like 4-5k each instead of the 6-7k. Imo better than this AA meta. Or at the very least WG could set up a TST Server with multiple options so we could do some larger scale testing how these different solution play out at the end.

Thinking about target selection is generally fine. That’s not my problem. My problem are the excessive plane losses that are inherent to the way the “balans” is done. It makes it a dull and unfun kamikaze game. A CV should be able to mitigate losses (other than through this silly sling shot). I would even trade in a little alpha for better survivability to make the CV game less frustrating.

Yep that would have been the best way (and the proper way) to do it

Current T4 CVs are not balanced but grossly underperforming

That is a very poor comparison. A game is per definition casual whereas survival on the battlefield isn’t really, is it? I don’t know how you come to the conclusion that players can’t handle the other classes btw. The playerbase has no issues with the other three classes. All of them are quite easy to play, including the “impactful” DDs. All of them are balanced around a healthy average so yea, unicums can still pull off their thing. Why should CVs be different on only playable by some?

I still don’t see why you believe that. If plane losses get decreased and alpha potential as well - how would the be either OP or unplayable? The problem of “unplayable” only comes in when you go too much towards all-or-nothing in my opinion. So why not move away a bit further? What is your proposal?

Does it? Aren’t you telling everyone CVs are OP? Well that’s an old one. On the CC summit S_O said they want to look into spotting after they know how the next to nerf hammers worked.

And that is exactly the problem. You want to balance CVs based on 100% perfectly played and all exploits used to perfection. Maybe the group of good players is smaller but it doesn’t matter. The class needs to be balanced for the average. And I highly doubt your statement works for the average right now. If good players overperform in result you need to cut some potential. Don’t you see that customizing the class to a small group would bring us to the very same mess we are coming from? Again and see above. It would be ok to reduce the effectiveness of certain weapons (rockets, some HE and AP bombs) to Lowe the overall offensive potential if needed. But this needs to be pinpoint accurate if done. Really? Do you have a source? “Own” solution sounds terrifying...

Tippe auf 65€ Gamescom Speshul und alternativ für irgendeine Ingame Währung

Didn’t mean you are dishonest, especially not about your intentions - that came across wrong. Still I am not sure - as you are constantly neglecting averages and average skills in your balancing arguments - if you are using these to support your opinion rather than looking from a global perspective. Which is average btw and which applies to All classes

Says who? I am going off the IJN line and the losses are high. Plus: no need to go into extremes again. Reducing AA - and flatten the AA progression - should limit excessive plane losses. No need to reduce alpha to garbage level in return - just level it out to a reasonable point if needed. But balancing the CV over damage rather than losses to a point where it resembles a crappy kamikaze mini game would be much better. Mind you that damage wise the class isn’t really over performing even today so the adjustments to alpha to even out better plane survivability shouldn’t be really too extreme. First of all that is not the official statement. The statement is: WG wants to look at CV spotting but not before the next two nerf hammers are in effect. My favorite idea was the “transmit Recon” button idea from the forums here. Meaning spotting for the fleet would still be possible but more controlled and would have a limited Recon duration and a Cooldown. At least I would be curious to see how that works out in testing.

I would reduce AA or increase plane HP to reduce losses and and if CV damage is to high reduce planes’ alpha instead of their survivability. EDIT: and yes I don’t like the logic with the last plane. Why not test damage distribution to the last wing instead and see where we land Plus the ideas to alter spotting in case WG feels that it needs changing are all on the table.

What question? That I would support And that I still disagree with. I think it can be balanced to a “good enough” state but in my opinion we are not there

How - other than through some stupid exploits? Why? Didn’t call you dishonest. You were always quite open and clear that your target is to destroy the rework.

So you are telling me your intention is a balanced and working rework?

I have the feeling you are pulling my leg dude. You keep repeating this bull- about unopposed even I told you already. But again for you: while surface Ships shouldn’t feel helpless (that is not the case after 0.8.5 - they drive in easy mode now) the plane losses shouldn’t be as excessive as today and it should be possible to mitigate plane losses. Right now it is braided throughing things at the wall hoping something sticks. That is braindead and terrible design and not fun at all. When playing surface ships it’s absolutely irrelevant if a CV is in the game as my AA will keep me save anyway. That is not balance and whoever calls that balance isn’t honest and just looking for no-effort play

Euer Brainstorming in Ehren aber dass Flieger nicht für sich selbst Spotten können ist maximal unsinnig! Es gibt in alles Forumsteilen sinnhafte Vorschläge, das Spotten zu reduzieren. Die wenigen, sinnvollerweise umsetzbar wären sind nach wie vor: 1) „transmit Recon“ button. Staffel spottet für sich ganz normal, kann aber dem Team den „Spottingbericht“ aber nur auf Knopfdruck zukommen lassen. Wenn aktiviert sieht das eigene Team alles, was die Staffel sieht für X sec, der Button selbst hat Y sec cooldown 2) Spottinggenauigkeit: Team sieht zwar alles, was die Staffeln sehen, aber Spotting ist nicht 0 oder 1. Weit entfernt fahrende Ziele werden erstmal nur als „X“ oder so dargestellt, klassifiziert erst auf mittlere Distanz (BB, CL, CA, DD) und für eine genaue Identifikation, also Schiffsklasse, Spieler sowie Kurs und Geschwindigkeit muss die Staffel eben ganz nah heran. Sprich: je genauer das Spotting sein soll, desto genauer muss die Staffel heran 3) Delay: wie beim Radar werden Spotting Ergebnisse mit einem 6? Sec Delay an die Flotte weitergegeben. Die Staffel muss ein Schiff also 6sec gespottet halten eh überhaupt ein Bericht an die Flotte erfolgt 4) „Spot Target Button“: wie 1) aber übermittelt lediglich ein einziges Ziel unter dem Sucher an den Rest der Flotte. Sonst kein Spotting für das Team 5) Ersetzen der Raktenflieger durch Aufklärungsflugzeuge ohne nennenswerte Bewaffnung. Strike Flieger Spotten nur noch für sich selbst, für die Flotte nur noch die Aufklärer. Der CV hat also die bewusste Wahl: spotting für das Team oder Strike. Das sind die fünf, mit denen ich ganz gut leben könnte und die alle irgendwie etwas für sich haben