El2aZeR

Alright, client is up and running. Installation went somewhat smoothly (couldn't change the install directory but then again maybe I just missed the option to) and my ping is surprisingly decent at 100ms. (Although ping might get much worse during peak times. It is currently like 9 in the morning in China.) Feels very weird starting out at T1 again tho. I'll see about working around the payment options in the CN premium shop to get myself a Saipan and an Enterprise.

I suppose WG still thought the RTS iteration was salvageable back then. Also need I remind everyone that WG previously thought RTS AP bomb performance was fine and now call it a toxic mechanic? Or how many of their stated issues they've actually solved with the rework? In the end the rework is about making money. WG felt that they can sell more premium CVs with the rework rather than keeping the old system. At least that's what I believe. Because if their intention truly was to improve gameplay then... yeah.

Meh, can't be much worse than the CV rework ery tbh. Also Enterprise and Kaga are on sale. For a measily 27€ each. Be aware that you apparently need to manually dl 20gbs worth of installer in separate parts. I'll report back whether it works or not.

Well, time to migrate guys!

"Better CV player on enemy team = instant loss" or the other way around.

The sad truth is fighters are supposed to be garbage in the new CV iteration. WG wants CVs to focus on fighting surface ships, not air-to-air combat. Fighters in testing were substantially more effective than they are currently. WG felt that was too much.

Near perfect first attack, 2 citadels. Near perfect second attack, 2 citadels. Half-ed third attack, 5 citadels. PRAISED BE RNGESUS!

Take a look at what happens during and after New Year's in general.

Detonation.

Hint: That button did nothing. Just like most report options now do nothing. Literally nothing.

Just recently had someone telling me what a CV player I am for not spotting torps for him. I did not even bother to tell him that aircraft can't do that anymore. He probably wouldn't have believed me anyway.

I'm keeping all of them so far even if I'm really only playing E and Midway. You never know what glorious balans decisions WG ends up making next.

Basically this, however ships that aren't bristling with AA by nature would still benefit as base AA should get buffed as a result. As it stands right now the disparity between having an AA build and not having one is far too high. Imo base AA should be somewhere in between that. Picking AA skills and upgrades would be much cheaper but also less potent. This results in both a higher AA floor but lower ceiling. So in essence a buff to base AA but nerf to AA builds.

Indeed. I've said it from day one that WG designed themselves into a corner with the rework. They want CVs to be more popular, but enabling that would make skilled CV players far too powerful. On the other hand if they want to neuter skilled CV players then the average player inevitably gets locked out hard, making CVs once again a niche class. It is what happened with the previous CV iteration and it looks like it is happening once again. Lets hope for improvements in the future but I'm not optimistic to say the least.

Ah, now I see. Should've written "overall damage potential has actually increased substantially." which is what I meant. My bad, sorry about the confusion. Thing is AA has taken over the role of fighters entirely. The only thing really differentiating RTS fighters and the potency of current AA is the ability of RTS fighters to deny scouting. As such I see this as a shift rather than an outright advantage. And ofc with more people building for AA along with issues that have plagued CVs for years (tiering e.g.) imo it's safe to say that the meta is harsher for CVs compared to previously, but that doesn't really faze reworked CVs as they got handed several advantages in terms of damage dealing potential. If you're skilled enough to exploit those, you'll end up with stats comparable to pre-rework CVs despite the more hostile meta. Indeed. Been saying that for years. Safe to say that WG isn't listening.

Yes, as you're (I would assume deliberately) leaving out everything that leads to my conclusion. As for the rest of your post, read the stuff posted above again. Hints: - overall stats don't matter, performances of top players matter. Average players will never unlock the full potential of a ship, they're thus irrelevant when talking about such. - the meta has changed pretty harshly for CVs

Sometimes I wonder, do you deliberately nitpick stuff out of context and present them in a way that suits your narrative or are you actually incapable of reading?

The simple fact that there are CV captains performing`on about the same level as previous RTS CVs despite a far more hostile meta? If you want hard stats on it, well, they do not exist. We do not know the number of captains running AA builds prior to the rework for example but I can tell you from experience that it was extremely low and I highly doubt yours will be any different. A meta shift like this can only be experienced, not found on any stat sites. And I am extrapolating my experience in two CVs to all CVs because according to statistics there are a number of people doing very well with them. If i see one guy reaching 100k damage and 70%+ WR despite a large number of battles played I don't need to play the Shokaku myself to know that you can still do well in her for example. That overall CV stats are down shouldn't be a surprise to anyone either. With the recent nerfs WG has once again made sure that only the best players can survive and thrive in CVs. Combine that with how many captains have tried CVs for the very first time after the rework and how fast the hotfixes came on overall stats will inevitably nose dive as many players simply got trashed by the hotfixes. if you want to know how far the potential of any ship reaches though then you must look at the stats of the very best players. And barring the outliers that are easily explainable (beta stats when CVs were hilariously op, low tier CV stats done with manual drop) they largely remain in line with each other. So to sum it up we have: - An extremely hostile meta for CVs previously only ever seen in competitive. - Overall CV stats down but high level CV stats remaining largely the same. That would very much suggest to me that the damage potential of CVs, barring the T4s, has increased rather harshly. Or would you disagree? I'm not saying that the hotfixes were for the better or sth, but to demand more damage dealing options when CVs are already extremely potent at it is silly at best. Focus should be put on actually fixing the numerous core issues with the class, not making them more broken.

Bleeding players is natural after New Years. If you look at how the population develops WoWs has already experienced a heavy increase in players around Xmas time which will inevitably drop off again in the following few months. Prior to Xmas 2018 peak population was usually around ~25k. This is what we're currently returning to. It's completely normal. Now if player numbers would continue to drop below that, that would actually mean players are leaving this game. Current numbers however suggest that the population remains stable as it has for years.

What many people do not realize is that overall damage potential has actually increased substantially. The only reason why reworked CVs are "hampered" in damage stats is due to AA ship spam. And by hampered I mean they perform comparable to their predecessors despite a far more hostile meta. RTS CVs would perform far worse now than they did previously. Here is what it looks like when a reworked CV encounters a situation reminiscent of the meta before the rework: So yeah, reworked CVs do not need more methods to deal damage. They already heavily outperform their predecessors in that regard.

Flak targets you in a way that always leaves the same time for you to react. Naturally that means the faster you go, the further forward flak is going to spawn. If you go slow on the other hand it will spawn much closer. Basically AA range tells you when flak will start/stop shooting at you, not what the max range of said flak actually is. Technically flak range is unlimited as it is entirely dependent on the speed you're going. That's not a bug, that's simply the way flak is designed.

COMRADE BORIS HAS BEEN RECOGNIZED BY GLORIOUS COMMITTEE FOR HIS HEROISM! WE MUST CELEBRATE THIS JOYOUS OCCASION! BRING OUT THE VODKA COMRADES!

Someone else suggested to tune AA hit probability according to tier since hit probability is a multiplier for AA DPS to get true DPS (100 base DPS and 70% hit probability means true DPS is 70 for those that don't know yet). So basically something along the lines of +/- 10% hit probability per tier difference upwards or downwards respectively. (Just picked 10% as an example btw, it's probably too high. What percentage is actually needed will obviously require a lot of fine tuning.) This would also have the added benefit of making lower tier AA not completely worthless against higher tier aircraft. One of the issues that have been pointed out with this is that hit probability also affects the number of flak bursts spawned, but I'm sure that can be separated from the DPS part. Personally I liked this one best so far and have already made a post about it in the official feedback thread.

One of the primary goals stated by WG for the rework was to introduce CVs into CBs. Yeah, I don't see how they can possibly fit now either.

I mean, I know he's pretty big on ops and those don't get listed in stats. He could've just played CVs in those and while it isn't exactly the random experience, bots in ops are often AA spec'd and can be considered a lot smarter than your average player. Personally I believe it is largely due to their MM. T6 and T8 are known hotspots for getting up tiered and getting up tiered in a CV is currently extremely tedious and painful. Still, there are others succeeding despite that. I am not the end all authority on the CV rework after all, so I reckon that they are still effective. Whether they are fun to play however is a different story altogether.