Ishiro32

I am sorry, but why would you imply that I have ever said something like that. In this topic alone I have given 3 propositions for expanding gameplay that would result in I would hope increasing the fun for the crusiers who are speced for air escort, sure it would be more difficult but effectivness would rise also. You can go back and chack all my posts about carriers, there is quite a number of those. You will find propositions to giving DDs option to selfdefend by giving bonus to stationary planes to stop mindless spotting. Clouds is the idea that would work against planes. I have been talking about lowering flooding ratio because flooding was unfair for low tiers as two torps could sink tier IV BB. I am dumbfounded. My stats represent my philosophy for balance. If something is broken, abuse it until it's fixed. I played Hosho by issuing 2 actions per minute to show how broken autodrop was in one patch. Generate data or nothing will change. I also did not stop playing carriers because of the nerfs as you can see in my rank stats. Calling me rusher is an insult for me. Carriers had to be nerfed because they were fun at the expense of others. They were OP. They need rebalance and that's why I do believe WG should focus on expanding options to counterplay the carriers. That's why I agree with iChase here. Simplicity is issue. Please bear in mind that other than damage nerfs, carriers had a lot of changes to how they control. A lot of the frustration come from that. Also what would you imagine they could do other than this rts-light?

I do not agree. Carriers were OP and needed nerfs, that's just plain fact. If not then, then later. As I have said at the start of OBT, carriers should not be released to the public, they were just not ready for prime time. They received nerfs, a bit too harsh since some of the nerfs affected usability and enjoyment of play. Hell, even right now carriers in right hands do perform well. Ranked results for Pape, Uocat or mine show you that those ships do still can do well. This is after the loooong and depresing list of direct and indirect nerfs. Carrier players do not cry because of the lack of power, but because game is painful to play and only the most dedicated or new still bother with it. What carrier need right now is rebalance and rework to make them fun.

I have anwser for your concerns. Those are all valid points and the fear of creating game so complicated that it scares off new players and is a burden on a player is something that devs should have in mind, but... There are games which are considered complex but are very easy to play. Chess is perfect example, game which has abundance of options closed in small ruleset. I think GO is also great example. From the video game world, fighting games are super high skill celling, but at the same time are easy to play even by the newest of players. The most important thing is that new player would not be set back by a significant margin while not using those system optimally, but at the same time player who spends time playing with game will reach new heights. Keys is how easy and natural mechanics are. Those systems would also work best if they would have been woven into the natural gameplay style of player. So even without any knowledge they would benefit from it and hopefully with time they would naturally understand the benefits of some behaviors. For my proposition of AAA change and creating zones it does apply. It is natural, because it would work similary to the secondary guns (you have more guns at some side, then damage is bigger) at the same time player who is aware of how to use this mechanics would still have some kind of defence, but player who will master movement and positioning will provide better cover for all. You could also easily implement UI feedback to make it even more obvious for players which of their sides has more AAA and how they should turn. If you are not good enough to think about it on the fly then you will be less effective, that's all, but when you will master it, you will be much stronger than now. AA and planes are considered a bit advanced mechanics and low tier CVs are super slow, so understanding all that should not be a big burden for players since it only starts to crop out on mid tier. Haze and weather is also very natural thing to understand. It decreases visibility, acting similar to smoke, but only for air. You can create complex games, you just need to make sure the basic gameplay is stellar and all the additional stuff is very easily understanded. The most important parts of gameplay in WoWs are: 1.) Manuvering and positioning 2.) Enemy movement prediction in both torpedo and gun comabt. You just need to make sure that all new mechanics compliment those two main gameplay elements. In this case, micro managing repair parites does not fit and would be external mechanic, but... that doesn't change fact that game is too simple for it's own good and lacks options and places for people to grow. Bonus: How would I change the panic button. Rework it into beeing something closer to manual AA. Let's say you activate it, you lose control over guns, but instead you control cone (similar to torpedo one). All planes in that cone are panicked and depending on the range they are either wasted or nothing happens to them. At long range this cone would only panic and deal almost no damage, but near the ship it could just obliterate anything in the sky in the matter of seconds. Just like that, puff and whole wing is gone.That way you can use long range AA barrage to panic planes that attack your allies, while at the same time if you escort someone you alone could get rid of everything. That way escort ships and gameplay has meaning, but If someone is not good at it, he still has AAA. Make this AAA barrage mode last like 10s, cd 120s and no limit on usage. Give also bonus exp for each plane which dropped bombds while panicked, very small bonus for panicking plane and increase exp for wasting planes with that skill. Here, I have created nightmare for any CV skipper, but at the same time this does create holes in CA AA defence as they can't defend from each side at the same time. Does this sound too complex for people who want to play escort crusiers?

Good games should be able to engage people with over 1000 battles (it's not like I have played around 3-4k games in LoL and the same number in Dota). What he said is just there is not enough systems to give player enough tactical options. Lack of options is making game stagnant and forcing people to do the same thing over and over again without any place to innovate. It's too simple even for it's own good. Manual AAA and secondaries would be too much indeed. But you don't have to make players do something additionaly, you might just give them option to do something instead. Also honestly BB gameplay, compared to what I was doing at tier X CV is sleep inducing. Stuff must be exciting and easy to digest at the same time. Easy to learn, hard to master. He doesn't exaggerate. Crusiers have 7km no drop zone bubble with one press of a button. Huge game changing effect with minimal effort. This is the definition of bad game design. This doesn't feel good for crusier as his imput was so small and is very frustrating for carriers. This has to be reworked with AAA. As I have said above, options. If someone picks US CA and decides to be AA shield for his team, make his gameplay rewarding and exciting. Options. If WG wants to make this game into E-sport it has to deal with impact of RNG. For people saying HS is esport... It's hardly competetive. It's fun to watch and is super popular. That's all.

Well, hard to argue with what he said. I myself was rather vocal about AAA simplicity and issues with it for at least two months now (it's just beeing vocal, the issue itself is my gripe since start of the beta), it should be focus for the devs if they want to fix carriers. Issue with simplistic fighters is also one of my few topics I have created in the CBT and something that I am still not happy with, although it's better than it was. I planned to create big topic for feedback regarding it, but it's so hard to motivate yourself when issues are so complex. This is what iChase said, everything is so interwoven into each other that it's a mess. Some of my notes regarding AAA:

I have played on tiers VI - VIII in recent weeks and I will tell you that in Random games I have seen one of the worst CV skippers ever. To the point that I was screaming at the screen and I had flashback from my time in LoL when as ADC I got support which was so bad he was playing against me. I am super calm and focused gamer, so getting me rilled up is quite a feat. CVs are hard to do damage right now, so I think WG will try to make class a bit easier to perform avg, while trying not to get the dmg out of hand like it was at the start of the OBT. I mean I had 130k avg in tier VI, 140k in tier VII and I have seen 150k in tier VIII. It was over the top. As for going back, while I do agree there are issues and loooong list of direct and indirect nerfs is quite depressing and you start thinking, why would I even bother. There were some good changes. - fighter skill and reduced scalling with tier for fighters - new dive bomber manual drop for IJN is amazing - turning on a dime was a big problem and it was unfair to others. It had to go - getting rid off full strike setups was good idea - float planes while annoying, do provide a lot of gameplay opportunities and are fun (though I would say the panic CA skill needs further adjustments considering number of threats for air) - empty bombers have 25% speed buff (at the start of 0.3.1 we did not have it and it's great) So you know.. there was some stuff worth keeping.

When Honor/Karma was introduced in LoL couple of things happen. Initially everyone was using it. There were boarders for honor and people loved that stuff. After some time Riot released information that toxicity in game lowered significantly. Right now I don't think anyone is using this system as often, but I do think it had overall positive impact on game. Personally I almost never use stuff like that, but option to do that is useful. As for carriers, I don't think they are in as bad spot as some make it to believe, even right now. The landing bug killed IJN, but after it was fixed I would say they still perform well. Essex and Midway are just slightly over the top, but that's other thing. There is ofc issue of perception and how satisfying gameplay is, but considering the patchnotes posted here and the NA Q&A the quality of life seems to be focus right now for carriers. So I would be optimistic. Ernesta is the genkies and cutest, too bad she is attatched to such a bad and generic show.

Woha, woha... mate, who said I want to police fun. Go for it, be excited, speculate etc. You have bunch of information. You can always do something like takeda92 here. Crosschecks are OP. Please nerf. WG announced some information regarding 0.5.2, there was data mine from client and now you have that. You are free to have fun with all that. @down PM-ed you to not create offtopic here.

I just don't like seeing retarded discussions (it's like you have never seen me posting) and actually my post was forwarded more towards ST than anyone else.

OVanBruce, This is pretty much what I wrote. DIdn't I? That I have never seen issue with it and I see no reason for discussion regarding those notes, since everyone knows the drill already. Things and stuff .

I have no idea what the deal is about. I see just a bunch of notes that are from unconfirmed source and for all we know they could be fake or true. It's meaning is negligible for the playerbase. The same applies for the data mined from the public client. The same goes for the data mined from the client itself where we saw for example Tone Model. Tone model was leaked at the end of september If I remember correctly... so what about it? We also have seen either Kaga or Akagi model (don't remember now) at the start of closed beta. So what? Stuff changes, stuff is pushed back. If someone is willing to seek for unconfirmed data he has no right to complain when this unconfirmed information will be not true. Also I have never seen people do that, so that's why I don't really know what this discussion is about. Meh... Things and stuff.

That's what I meant by saying hillarious. This topic is soon gonna be Vuked to the oblivion, so let's enjoy the ride while we can.

Listen to the music mate and chill. Most people don't care about anime stuff and it's turned off by default. Some part of the community will enjoy it. As for DDs I can only say that you need to learn how to play. Game has issues as I have said, but not those which you wrote.

Game has issues, but topics like that are so missing the point it's hillarious.

Funny quip for someone whose only argument is ad hominem. Read again what I wrote, because I already anwsered your second point.

Well, I wouldn't really call it excel. What CVs have is that they can delay cap one time, after that the rearm time is too long to do more. Not to mention that most DDs cap in a smoke which makes DBs primary tool for decap useless. So against DDs it's usually either sink or scare away with torps. Obviously I usually try to sink them or damage it to the point DD from my team can easily finish it off. CVs are useful, but hardly they excel at it. Riveting feedback. Not like this topic was started so people can talk abou tier VI VII CV gameplay and problem it has. CVs were overnerfed in the wrong places, now they have to scale it back. I honestly was always least intrested in damage statistic as I think it can be easily adjusted by the flat number change. This is the problem in discussion like this. People are talking about how drop feels, what they find frustrating etc. Feedback regarding how fun is to play class and how satisfing it is. What people like you talk is numbers in void. Pointless

I just said that you lack basic knowledge about how carriers work and are unable to analyse the data you are providing. You can not look at the numbers in a void and this is exactly what you do right now.

Still? Wait... what? Are we in patch where they introduced IJN and they had tight spread? Hillarious... Let's see... 5 games in CVs in total with the stats from CBT. Yup, that's about right. Sorry, but after reading something so clearly not true I just had to check it myself. I knew what I would see. How can you even talk about class balance when you are so ignorant about it's gameplay, quirks and issues it has. You have no knowledge to read the statistics you are using. As for AAA, I said it couple of times that it has to be reworked so angle of approach is taken into damage calculation. Giving each ship "front" zone AAA,"rear" AAA etc. 8 zones like that would exapand gameplay significantly and should be easy for the game itself as no simulation is required. I think whole AAA escort require extensive overhaul so it would require active participation from the AAA escort ship. Also defensive fire skill needs some look too, it was designed when the skies were clear from fighters and the same as AAA it is too easy to use.

Well written, you have +1 just for that, but... Let me have a jab at it since, I don't really think system like that could work right now. You are pretty much gamifing the whole process of obtaining stars. The issue here is that your allies actually become the enemy in this situation. If there are two guys in a team who did most of the job (like 2k base exp each) this would make other people harder to get a star. Now since the progression is depended on the exp, imagine how people will play around it. They will, there is no doubt about it. Most exp you get by dmg ships and by capping. You are promoting DDs here very hard since in Ranks they are the ones that cap and they can easily top score board just with that. Yes capping is useful, but at the start of the game it's just a pointless race, no skill. Still big part of exp contribution. What other thing is there, oh yes. Dmg, this would really promote sniping BBs more. People will try to "farm" damage and ignore anything else. so my first argument is that it would promote solo oriented playstyle that would not be usefull to the team. Ok, now other thing. Exp system is just not that good. As I have said capping is strangely profitable, but now let's think about other stuff. Like blocking a cap. It's common tactic for DDs to swim in the cap to block it, it does not give any exp, but generating threat and blocking point capture is very important. At the same time let's talk about planes. Carriers get no exp for spotting even though they are the ones that can shut down DDs from a game passively. They are contributing to the team effort to win, just game does not acknowledge that. Taking damage and beeing shield for your team is also important. Not to mention that 2 North Carolinas are creating bubble to which no sane CV will fly. Zoning is important. my second argument is that exp system is too primitive to use it as rank progression. I understand what your proposition is adressing and I agree that this is a huge problem. The rank feel too random. Actually there is simple reason for that... mode was designed around people getting to rank 1 with 50% winratio and after getting to rank 1, stoping playing. Extensively this beeing just one big mission that big % of players need to accomplish. Rewards for winning and losing are not a problem, problem is that current rank system does not sort people by their skill at all. You want to fix it, it's simple, you need to do two things: 1.) Make sure that top players occupy top ranks and are not rotated out by weaker ones 2.) Make that so person with 50% winratio has harder time going up and going down. Basically elo system which actively tries to keep you in elo to which you belong. Without those two things, even with your system, ranks will still be randoms with huge disproportion of skill.

Even with mirror matchmaking picking fighter loadout is poor choice. I know, because I have been testing it on Ranger. In ranked season 1 played ranger on fighters If I remember correctly had 52% winratio 30k avg dmg Random ranger with rigid MM. I had around 70% winratio and 110k avg dmg This fighter meta is the most confusing thing I have seen.

Carriers having so much lower damage than battleships is a sign that that CVs were over nerfed. Carriers is a class that often survive whole game, so that damage is dealt during whole that time. Imagine how low impact they have if they are lower than a class that can die after 5-10 minutes. Also fighter meta is the most hillarious thing I have ever seen. Why? How? What is the point. I play RJ with my friends casualy and I have seen Indi on 2/0/1 setup. WHY? I understand Bogue to an extend. I mean that ship is garbage anyway, but Indi? Why would you do this? Also I have seen some shokaku players in random and my god, people have no idea how to play carriers on tier VIII.

I have no issue with how ugly skin is. It's optional and some might find it intresting, whatever. I don't like consumable premium goods, I find them always waste of money. Would it cost 30 gold, 10 gold, doesn't make difference for me. Either pay a lot of gold and make it's usage unlimited or give option to buy it for credits. For me personaly, I see no big benefit to the 100% exp so difference between this and other camo is not really an issue for me. I did not grind anything for a long time, I am did not buy premium again for a reason and als I have couple hundreds exp flags left If I really wanted to grind. So yeah... At the end of the day, my opinion on it is... Meh, whatever.

Torpedy musza byc zrzucone na wode. Gra nie bierze pod uwage topografi i realistycznych mechanizmow podchodzenia do zrzutu. Jezeli jest woda to moze w ten punkt byc zrzucona torpeda i tyle. Teraz torpeda w wodzie musi przeplynac troche zanim bedzie aktywna, nie pamietam teraz odleglosci dokladnej, ale jest to mnie wiecej dlugosc pancernika. Po tym jak przeplyna ten kawalek to sie aktywuja i robia obrazenia, wtedy tez pojawiaja sie nad nimi czerwone/zielone znaczniki. Zanim to sie stanie, to moga Cie trafic, ale odbija sie od burty i nic nie zrobia. Ogolnie gora jest przeszkoda dla lotniska jezeli jestes wystarczajaco blisko ladu. Edit. Tak gwoli wytlumaczenia wszystkiego. Mechanizm podchodzenia do ladowania jest realizowany poprzez okrag podejscia do zrzutu. Zasada zrzutu manualnego jest taka: 1.) Wybierasz punkt na mapie, kat podejscie jest determinowany poprzez pozycje oddzialu a wybranego punktu. 2.) Samolot musi wleciec w okrag zrzutu. Musi on wejsc w miare po normalnej, czyli zadnych ostrych katow, jezeli kat jest zbyt ostry to oddzial automatycznie obroci i odejdzie na wieksza odleglosc. 3.) Jak juz samolot jest w okregu to nie da sie wydac zadnych rozkazow az do czasu zakonczenia zrzutu. 4.) Samoloty leca jakis czas az dolatuja do punktu zrzutu, tutaj laduja torpedy i gra sprawdza czy to woda czy wyspa. 5.) Po paru sekundach torpedy sie aktywuja, a samolty zawracaja i odzyskujesz nad nimi kontrole.

You mean that operation which missed the time when one of the main targets was in port and did not even destroy all fuel storage even though it was easy target?

@up I agree that from the point of WG this is sound financial decision, but I do think we have a right to be angry about it. Thing about premium stuff being overpriced is that it taps into the players good will to increase the sale. Fact is that those high bundles would not sell as good if there was an option to buy just ship, they are overpriced as other content provided in them is of low value to the player. So why people buy them? Because they like the game, because they like the ship, because they want to support WG. With limited purchase window WG is creating situation where buyers are buying it slightly against their own judgment. They are willing to do it because of the good will builded by the game. Consumer good will is a finite resource, that’s why I call it short term strategy. The simcity example I have provided earlier worked in similar way. EA basically spend value of the franchise to conduct DRM experiment on a big scale. This aggressive pricing tactic is much closer to the mobile games. Those titles resolve around whales which are super invested in the game and are not bothered by the price tag and value (their good will is not being affected) and around rotating number of players who loose interest after certain point. You require constant stream of new players to sustain it. I do not compare whole game models to the mobile, just how pricing affects the player base. This strategy will result in the lower playerbase over time. The requirement for premium at high tier is kinda fitting to it, don’t you think? So far WG is playing rather safe with their bundles as there are not yet enough premium ships to generate saturation for the casual players. They are spacing their offers with time, varying prices based on the target audience (cheap blyskawica bundle targeted at easter Europe and pricey UK bundle). But, this is just a matter of time before this model will saturate itself. This model is not optimal for game growth and I do think that players have a claim to rise concerns about it, because they are worried. I will blame people for buying into this and supporting that bad practice, but there is a reason why people voice it on forum so loud. They want this game to thrive and expand. This model does not support this direction, which is the underlying root cause of those topics.