Jump to content

MadGunna

Players
  • Content Сount

    142
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    1625
  • Clan

    [SB]

About MadGunna

  • Rank
    Petty Officer
  • Insignia

Recent Profile Visitors

743 profile views
  1. MadGunna

    General CV related discussions.

    My god. The madmen actually did it. I'm in awe at both the sheer brass balls and the fact this game still somehow attracts new players. I'm legit not even angry, just baffled.
  2. MadGunna

    General CV related discussions.

    Yes? That's why I said 'expanding on'. They're both raising good points that IMHO reinforce each other.
  3. MadGunna

    General CV related discussions.

    IChase adding his 2 cents, basically expanding on what Flamu already said. The two of them come to the same conclusion @El2aZeR already drew years ago. The gameplay loop is fundamentally broken, any fixes basically boil down to 'back to the drawing board'.
  4. MadGunna

    General CV related discussions.

    Former CV main here, all I can say is me too buddy. Me too. I deleted the game, and now just keep my ear to the ground. If they bring back RTS well, I'll be back too.
  5. MadGunna

    General CV related discussions.

    I'd like to get fighters back, I loved to help my team by denying the enemy carrier strikes. Otherwise I'm ok with this. To be fair I'd be happy with anything that involves a return to the old RTS era. Perhaps with the current system replacing alt+click for strikes, to really force a trade off between accuracy and plane survival versus map awareness/presence.
  6. MadGunna

    General CV related discussions.

    Welcome to the CV rework. From the same developer that thought AP bombs were a great idea (despite the playerbase warning them it wasn't), removing manual drops from Tier 4 and 5 CV's was a great idea (despite the playerbase warning them it wasn't) AND releasing the Graf Zeppelin in the state it was was a great idea (despite the playerbase warning them it wasn't), you get this. The CV Rework. Also known as the CV REEEEEwork. Because having a class that potatoes couldn't really make work was just not what WG wanted, so they took out the RTS style behind the woodshed. Now we have this brand spanking new 'action' style gameplay where the player now flies around the map not actually in command of the CV. Instead they bomb the enemy fleet and nothing else. There's some flak that is thrown up by the targets under AI direction a pilot needs to dodge (they're not really a CV captain anymore) and of course they need to remain aware what targets are actually important to bomb and that's it. That's all it is now. Carriers have become something to grief the rest of the playerbase with, and according to WG this is the greatest thing they could do with the class. This, by the way, is the containment thread so the rest of the board doesn't get flooded with complaints about the rework. Welcome. Leave your hopes and dreams at the door. I hope against hope they will change it, preferably back to somewhat like how it used to be, but it won't happen.
  7. MadGunna

    General Submarines related discussions

    My point is simple, but for your sake I will spell it out. Original statement: It is hard to deal with a sub when I'm dodging AP from 3 other ships at the same time. Response: If you have 4 ships shooting at your cruiser, and one of those ships happens to be a sub, then the fault is not with the design of submarine and ASW gameplay.
  8. MadGunna

    General Submarines related discussions

    If you have 3 ships firing AP at your tier 6 cruiser you're playing it wrong anyway mate. Hide behind an island for most of the match or kite from a distance, even when it is oh so tempting to try out them new depth charges and ASW planes. This game landed me several 3+ kill games and a kraken in a Pepsi-Cola of all ships, and that is by supporting my subs. Your cruiser ASW is there to give you a fighting chance against a single sub that's caught you by surprise and end-game cleanup, same as the BB ASW I've found. Anyway after some more testing I don't have real complaints about ASW aspects, though I do find it a bit silly to see subs bombing it around the battlefield at periscope depth. It's also weird to find stationary subs more easily than an actively moving one. @YabbaCoe I'd highly recommend tying their detectability to their speed. A submarine that's running very slowly at max depth would be practically invisible for all intents and purposes, giving them an alternative way to evade unhealthy attention. Torpedo launches and pings should bump up detection just like high speed - essentially all things that make loud noises for sonar operators to pick up on. Subs should then be given the choice between sneaking off for a better shot or engaging. This does necessitate a net battery drain while diving, to force subs to the surface every now and then. To be frank I don't think it will be unreasonable to see subs as the most survivable class, as in they're the ones that stay alive at the very end of a match, much like CV's are currently. The way they play and the toolset they need to do their thing will mean they're simply difficult to pin down. Rather than force them to become something they're not, it seems better to accept this as inevitable and ensure they're fun to play against in the event they don't run and hide. Because all game modes have caps and point counters, the enemy team isn't denied their victory if the sub chooses not to engage after the rest of the enemy fleet is sunk. This is a thing today when the last survivor is a DD in a scenario without CV's anyway, or any instance where a team can win simply by waiting out the clock. Side note, Yabba? I don't know if this has even been considered before, or if the feedback was of any use at all. How often are these posts read, and how do suggestions here make their way to the devs? I'm not demanding you immediately call up Minsk, I'm just curious about the process. It's basically a refined version of what @Pikkozoikum suggested earlier upthread.
  9. MadGunna

    General CV related discussions.

    Same, would really want to see it. So, speaking of history, let's start with the always amusing Drachinifel. Settle down with a nice hot chocolate or other beverage of choice and let his dry wit take you from the humble beginnings as kite carriers and conversions to the first few purpose built prototypes.
  10. MadGunna

    General Submarines related discussions

    So far, I've had no complaints with regards to BB and CA submarine interaction. In a Pensecola, I scored a Kraken including one sub kill - the change from artillery to ASW planes and back felt very smooth and intuitive. Sailing my Lyons, I got into trouble fighting a submarine and a BB at the same time - which felt fitting in hindsight. Yes, I was at a distinct disadvantage as my only support was another BB, but I was not utterly powerless. I got a few licks in with the ASW planes but ultimately had to choose between angling my armour at incoming fire, dodging the torpedoes, and getting my turrets swung around the correct way. It really does feel like a good counter. I have yet to try the other classes. Gave the Dallas a try but I got too greedy and died to a Fuso before I could get charges away.
  11. MadGunna

    General CV related discussions.

    Apologies, I thought you meant the skill floor was lower before the rework.
  12. MadGunna

    General CV related discussions.

    ... You're joking right? Prior to the rework the skill floor for CVs was closer to, roughly, the peak of the Mont Blanc. Not the highest mountain, but in order to be halfway effective you needed to put in some effort. You needed to figure out the different controls, you needed to manage your airgroups etc. AA stung, because every plane lost was one you were not getting back, and anyone that popped DFAA essentially ruined any runs. Not to mention that the enemy CV usually had a fighter or two airborne that unlike now actually did things, just to make it that little bit harder. This, of course, was part of the issue. WG flat out stated the class was not accessible enough to the morons. To the potatoes that are their target audience. Player numbers were never high to begin with, but they appear to be better than before the rework (though to what extent the tier IV carriers pump up the numbers, I don't know).
  13. MadGunna

    Submarine Testing

    So I just watched the vid, and I gotta say this iteration is better than previous versions. I still think there should be a clearer divide between the roles of various surface and submerged states. Make each depth really feel like a unique stance for the submarine and the key to success should take the proper stance according to the situation. Much like how other classes require the proper use of consumables and abilities, such as how Battleships need to learn how their armour scheme works, how DD's need to learn their torpedoes are best utilised, etc. I imagine something like this: Surfaced ++ Speed + Firepower - Stealth -- Survivability Surfaced subs get to recharge their batteries so fast they can ping like they're actually playing pong. On top of that, they get the best speed on the surface, much like how in real life they would travel to places fast. the downside is obviously, how obvious they are. With the armour of a coke-can they are prime targets for everything, and pinging reveals their location. Most of this is already implemented in game. Periscope ++ Firepower + Stealth - Survivability -- Speed Periscope depth offers better stealth but more importantly it should be the only mode that offers a guidance track for torpedoes. When played well the player should be able to land unguided torpedo hits out of the blue, although these hits do not ignore protection - they can still ping in this mode should they choose to do so of course, and this close to the surface the battery will still recharge slowly. Enough to allow for several sonar pings a minute, though banging away on active sonar will still drain it quickly. While the water offers some measure of protection, subs at this depth are still vulnerable to ship-borne artillery and aircraft ordinance. This mode is meant to deliver that big ambush alpha strike, but in return it slows the sub down to a crawl. In real life even today subs are extremely limited in their speed at periscope depth simply so they don't rip off the delicate instrument, and in game subs at this depth should be limited to a quarter speed at best. Fully submerged ++ Stealth + Survivability - Speed -- Firepower When hidden in the ocean depths, the sub is almost impossible to find. She can still give her position away with active sonar, but that should be a very deliberate decision on the part of her captain. Careful use of hydrophones let the sub pick out what's going on at the surface, call it half the normal detection ranges. As a nod to gameplay, subs should be able to somewhat move around, way faster than they could historically, but still slowly. Due to the 3D environment it is much harder to land pings, and the battery slowly drains to nothing even if she sits still. Trying to attack down here should be a very risky and awkward proposition. While sub versus sub engagements are possible, they are cumbersome - the best weapon versus another sub should be another surface vessel. A subs own torpedoes should be a last minute resort. This is actually how it mostly is in game already, were it not for the frankly somewhat silly recharging battery. To give a ballpark for duration, a sub that does nothing but stay submerged, so that means no pings at all, should I think be able to do so for about a quarter of a match - pings and violent maneuvers should drain more power, staying on the surface should recharge it. /2cts
  14. MadGunna

    General CV related discussions.

    Aaaah I see. Yeah the learning curve for that was a little tight. I'm a madlad who enjoys RTS just as much as shooters so I got really into it. To each their own. Not gonna lie. That made me giggle.
  15. MadGunna

    General CV related discussions.

    You. But. What. I. You literally press alt and click. Or bind it to another key if you can't get to alt in time for whatever reason. When it's best to do so was... was that really that difficult to figure out? Is that too much?
×