Ishiro32

Sometimes it doesn't kick in. I just lost two games because my internet connection died for second and I could not connect back.

Never said anything about tier IV and V. Those are abysmal and need serious look from devs in terms of attractiveness for a new player. Tier VI starts to get ships with strong AAA and AA barrage more often, you still have low reserves so you need to be somewhat creative. I like tier VI because I really like set of qualities CVL give to the player. Low reserves, stealthy, mobile, fast deployment. They are perfectly designed for short range torpedo bombings and fast fighter interceptions as you can sortie them from within the formation and not the back. They are also rather fragile so if spotted they can be quickly dealt with, but they are also strong against air threat as they have mobility to make them difficult targets for torps. I would be fine even with paper designs. I just do want to see something like that on higher tier.

I love my destroyer CV Ryuujou. Give me high tier carrier with similar concealment and maneuverability (even weaker planes compared to other carriers of that tier) and I would be all over that ship. Dancing between torpedo waves is not something that Haku or Midway can do and is very fun. So there is at least one person who likes one tier VI carrier. High tier CVL, I need this in my life!!

Póki co nie gram żadną inną klasą, więc te 100% to wiesz, ale nie ma co ukrywać że nie przebije swoich statów z lotniskowców DD-kami którymi planuje grać po zrobieniu Midwaya. No i jestem zawiedziony że użyłeś statów z mojego Taihou, strasznie mi na niej szło. Kombinowałem z fighterami, gubiłem się w skrótach klawiszowych i ogólnie straszna porażka. Wyglądałoby lepiej jakbyś użył moich statów z Ryuujou, Langleya lub chociażby Indi. W 0.4.1 jest sporo rzeczy które zmniejsza damage i performance lotniskowców. Nie wiem czy zmiany rudder shift-a przejda (biedne niszczyciele, kolejne nerfy), ale fakt jest ze zwiekszono efektywnosc mysliwcow a dodatkowo sporo malych bugow zostalo zgniecione. W PT strzalka kierunku samolotow juz nie kreci sie w koło, a także zwiekszono wymagania dotyczaca podejscia do okregu zrzutu, wiec 90 stopniowe zwroty w nalot juz nie będą możliwe. No i oczywiscie zmiany zestawów i nerf na service time. Z tym co było w PT, japońce pewnie straca z 40% sredniego damage-u a amerykańce z 10%. To tylko moja spekulacja i możliwe że bedą jeszcze inne zmiany zanim patch wejdzie, więc wiesz. Tak czy siak developerzy czytajac ich dev blogi chca by Lotniskowce zadawały więcej obrażeń niż BB-ki i to się raczej nie zmieni. Fajnie co prawda by klasa była trudniejsza, ale cóż... Umiejetnosc mysliwcow to przynajmniej mały krok w tą strone, więc warto być optymistycznie nastawionym. Odwrócony spread IJN który jest planowany już od dłuższego czasu napewno też troche zwiększy poziom trudności.

Hmmm... None of your post from this topic are relevant to the #1. In this topic you said exactly this Zone under which current direction is locked is drop circle. So you are saying there is a deadzone before this circle in which I can't do a drop correction. This was said regarding planes ignoring drop correction commands before they are locked into a run. Now I assume you simply are talking about drop circle and you just did not understand what I wrote, which is very often case with you, but if it's not the case then I would love to hear more about this dead zone. Maybe with screenshots or video, so even I can understand this mechanic you are talking about. But to be honest I don't really care. This was an old discussion and I don't see a point in bringing it back or seeing you trying to explain me in a smug way some basic control scheme which would be irrelevant to what I posted. Someone is salty about pointless reputation points. Oh and by the way to calm down your persecution complex. I did not downvote any of your post nor did I care enough to upvote any post people from the "cabal" as you lovely named them, whoever they are. Sure, sharana said that you need to get to higher tiers. I also said it. Reason is simple, low tier IV and V are not at all representative of the CV gameplay. From VI to VIII it is better and IX and X also change a bit in regards what skills are rewarded most. Implying that you need to go higher in tiers to fully understand the class does not imply "it's not that our ships are OP, it's that we're just that good" . You mentioned it yourself, reading comprahension. Use it. IV and V are worst tiers for carriers and I can't imagine anyone playing them for fun if they had an option to play higher tier. Regarding animu, How could I disappoint you. Well ignoring that half population thing is simple exaggeration without anything behind it. Let's also omit the fact that during CBT I was one of the more vocal person complaining about carriers so this pro-CV cabal sounds kinda silly. You will see me defending them right now, because most people instead of asking to make them less boring, increase the mechanical depth they pretty much just ask for the class to be removed. Slight adjustment for IJN? You know you can probably expect like 40% performance drop from the top players on tier V-VIII IJN? You know that rudder shift was buffed, you know that bugs with direction arrow and 90 degree plane turns were pretty much no more on the PT? I do worry about destroyers, but this is not a topic regarding them. Just MM change is a big thing for carriers. Landscape for carriers will change, this is not a slight adjustment. What changes should they do in your opinion so it wouldn't be the slight adjustments?

My favourite forumite is back. I don't know why you didn't want to give more details about that "dead zone" before the drop circle you mentioned earlier, but I guess you want this knowledge to be a secret, which is fine by me. It's not really all that fun listening to you spouting incorrect information with such a confidence. Based on what you wrote I though that maybe you finally got to tier VI or VIII CV. i was dissapointed. In fact you still did not manage to beat your max score on the Zuiho, which is considered as the most OP. I assume you stoped playing CVs all together. Too bad. Tiers V - VIII will get nerfs. You had occasion to check them on the PT, so I have no idea why you bothered to write another lenghty post about how much you think they should be nerfed. I think you might have anger issues and just needed to vent some of the frustration. I see no other reason for your post. As for this: I do think citation is needed here. You are such a smart and well prepared individual that I am sure you must have a direct post of mine which states something similar to this. You would never lie to make your whining post sounds more important and grand than it is, right?

Sorry. I was very tired when writing that post. Anyway I don't really want to go into details, but I do want for carriers to fail more often. I want them to die more often on the battlefield or mess thing up more often. Carriers are very forgiving. The only not forgiving part is the CV sniping, which should stop being dominant strategy for V-8 tiers with the 0.4.1. The difference between good and great player is not as big as it should be in my opinion. IJN tier X is not easy, you can't really talk with people on chat while playing it. It does require skill. Thing is... I just want more. More difficult, more powerfull, much less forgiving carriers, so I can see my mistakes clearly, so I can improve with each game, so I can never be satisfied with my performance. Call me greedy as I want even more power. Call me masochist as I want to keep failing at my favourite class. That's why for me... it's just low skill celling. Or maybe I just want more risk and excitment.

Maybe I just feel like this because if there is no opposition, carriers do feel kinda meh. When you are playing other classes you can always practice and perfect aiming. When playing LoL or Dota, even when playing against worse players you can practice and improve yourself. Manual aiming for carriers is a skill that right now is... well... easy, especially at high tiers there is almost no aiming. While I agree that at high tier requirments for tactical thinking, prediction and overall battle strategy requirments are high. For it to show up you need to be challanged. Without it, it is just.. farming. I do have high hopes for the fighters and MM changes to solve this.

With new fighters skill celling should jump quite a bit on the high tiers. I was talking mainly about situation from the live server. Maybe it's the fact that you need a good enemy CV as your enemy to actually you know... have competition. I don't know... I just don't feel that it's all that high.

Maybe I am spoiled by games like LoL and Dota, but skill celling is actually rather low. There are differences between great players and good ones and bad ones, but honestly I would never call it high skill celling. I sometimes think about skill floor and write celling and my main gripes are with skill floor, but celling is not high neither.

Skill celling/floor has nothing to do with performance. Fact that a lot of people have those high score means that carrier skill floor is very low. In fact people with no carrier experience, but with knowladge how to control carriers (youtube videos) and a bit of knowledge regarding ship stats and roles can still get good scores on their first games in this class. 40-50k Langley or 50-70k Hosho average per game is the results people like that have. Skill floor for carriers is low. That is just a fact and WG made them that way, because of people underperformance in them. The worst part is that most often thing said about low tiers is that they are boring. There is a lot of downtime, the requirments from player are low. To add to the damage most people on those tiers do not know how to counterplay, so games are even more boring.

If shimakaze was available without the need to grind tiers VII-IX then you would see at least 3 of them in each game in each team. She is a fun ship.

Nice one. I would really love for this game to be more oriented around dedicated players like you suggest, but sadly we know how new players are underperforming and how hard it is to switch yourself to the correct mindset. IJN CVs on release I think had around 10-15k average score. I have seen people with lower than 7k average damage per game in them. While I do hate changes which has happened to IJN carriers during that time (no one holds my hand when I have abysmal scores in any other class), there had to be something done to not scare people away from this class. Have a +1, but I don't believe we will see those changes, but I do think WG needs to focus more on rewarding the skilled players. I also want to mention that I agree with your vision of BBs. When I was playing them in CBT I loved that aspect of them, slow behemoths forcing their way through the map. I think game should compliment that feeling a bit more. It would also make even bigger distinction between Battleships and Battlecrusiers like Kongo.

Please remove arcade elements from this arcade game. If you would to give ammo to DDs you would have to buff torps some way or another. Giving them for example realistic detection range, range or damage. Anyway you don't want this game to be realistic. Honestly, destroyers needs buffs and quality of life changes... not nerfs.

Whatever helps you sleep at night. I would quote once again ending of Spec Ops: The Line, but I don't see a point. You can go back and check how exactly our animosity started, talking about right now is just offtopic. The same about unrelated chinese cartoons you love mentioning so many times, or was it korean? I think this topic is closed. Actually first planes were killed without barrage. I know because I have checked if the spread is panicked when this happened in game. I might check when exactly the AAA skill was activated on the replay later. Please stop putting words into my mouth. It is rather annoying that you do this constantly and probably is causing your confusion. You take what I said, add something to it from your head based on your image of my person, then spin some words to constantly imply that I am super fine with killing enemies just like that. This is the main reason why I despise you and your form of discussion. You weave into your "arguments" personal attacks. So please refrain from ever mentioning your distorted image of my person in this topic. I have my own issues with AA barrage and there are some problems here and there. That doesn't mean I don't like the concept of it or the idea behind it. I do have problem with AAA on the most basic level. You see the difference? AA barrage skill can be balanced so it feels ok for both parties, AAA in current form can not. AA barrage for some ships is so strong that it actually doesn't count as rng anymore. When it's activated you know that you will lose big chunk of your planes. It is still rng, but the chance for succes is so big that it stops feeling cheap. Also most often it is activated when planes are close, not at the max range. AAA on long range has very low chance to take out the plane. But it is big enough for some ships. Losing planes on those ranges feels cheap. There is no playing around it. No one desrved them. No one did anything. There was no engagment. There was not fight. Just... pum.. killed plane. No playing around it, no mistakes. Pum.. whatever. Die. You told about feedback, but about this? What feedback has ship that killed that plane? Only thing he see is the notification. It doesn't feel earned so people ignore it. What about carrier player? He feel cheated, chance is so low and there is nothing that you can do to prevent it. And you want to increase range, so that situation will happen much more often, as the dice roll will be happening much more often. Riveting vision. I have no problems with getting my planes killed because I messed up approach and had to do circle around target. Or because I tried to force my way through formation. Rules should be simple Carrier plays good + crusier plays bad = almost no plane kills Carrier plas good + crusier plays good = some plane kills Carrier plays bad + crusier plays bad = some plane kills Carrier plays bad + crusier plays good = lotsa plane kills Your idea does not fit it at all. As such for me it will only generate more issues than it will solve. It is simply bad game design and there is no way around it. Fact that carriers are overperforming does not change that it is flawed.

AAA clips through mountains and planes move and attack like mountains do not exist. I do agree that it look kinda ridiculous. There no quick fixes regarding this case or at least I don't think there are any possibilities other than small aircraft rework on engine level. Because this is rather small issue that would require rather hefty workload to deal with, I would assume that even if it is planned thing to address it has rather low priority.

I will be honest with you. I am playing this game, but I am mostly waiting for the organised play option. From what I have read from on devblog and considering all the changes we saw in patches. This is the type of game they want to create. It is rather ambitious project and unique considering the market. The exact reasons you mentioned how it might have issues on random play is something devs will have to find solution as those are indeed a problems, but at the same time this is also something that drew me into this game. This design philosophy might lead to doom, but I am willing to take a ride with it to see where it will go. I actually expect this game to be in mature form maybe during the first quater of the next year. There are still so many things to do. A lot of the system to look at, balance to fix, quality of life changes for new players etc.

It was you who acknowledged them wasn't you? I think like 3 or 4 times. If you didn't we wouldn't even talk about it right now, so talk about distracting. Also before I decided to show complete and total disrespect towards you, you attacked me personally multiple times, I even posted couple of examples in which you defended yourself by saying that you are just saying what you see. I do not plan to hide my contempt towards your idea of discussion. I think that's all I have to say regarding that topic. So let's get this straight back to the main course. Situation in the video is something that you are ok with? Just because it is one tier above? So planes shouldn't close the distance to 7 km (or more with your range buff) because high tier is supposed to win against low? One tier, 7km range, 5 planes in the span of couple of seconds. Should I always be so afraid of rng? It was one ship at 7 km range and that was around 41% of my attack planes, it also wasted about 6 minutes of my ingame time. If you keep saying it's unrelated it won't make it unrelated. Increase in range will increase the number of situations where it can happed. It is direct correlation, as such it is related to it. Even though you deny it. Sooo... Avoiding more gameplay and player input? I much more prefer panicked spread than seeing planes wasted because RNG said so. I have no issue with crusier who baited approach of my planes and wasted them with well timed AAA barrage skill, killing planes and messing any drop that could potentialy kill something at the same time. Barrage is something that is not really rng depended. Increase in range of AAA just makes rng more prominent element in aircraft vs AA combat as planes are longer in the "weak AAA" zone. I really think they just should increase the damage for the planes which are just hovering. If CV is just leaving planes to circle then they should receive more damage, so even DD could shoot them down. Bad CVs would lose planes on DDs, good would spot, but would have to actually pay attention to do it.

Hmmm... I have never said that carriers are not in need of changes. I have just issue with buffing AAA in a form as it is right now on the server. That's all. Issues you mention like manual aim and how it feels for the other side will not be solved by AAA buff. It will just generate frustration for carriers. Right now you can make AAA either OP or UP, but it will never feel good for any of the sides. Right now at higher tier is balanced so alone ship is easy pray while formation require carefull attacks on the outskirts of the formation to even do something, you are expected to lose some planes with each approach. We had players in this topic with 37 plane kills and they were still unsatisfied, this alone is a sign of deeply rooted design problem. If after 0.4.1 CV will be still overperforming then I would gladly talk about some more tweeks or possible reworks. As for the pictures. I am sorry, but when people are putting strange words in my mouth and comment on their image of my person during the discussion about mechanics and deny instead of actually discussing, then I hardly have any respect for that person. I will keep the conversation on the level and will be patient and methodical in the main thread, but that's all I can do. Pictures are form of levity, cool or not. Either way this is not a place to discuss it. If you find my arguments illogical and have issues with them then please voice those concerns, maybe I am missing something. You never know.

Can't get over few small pictures? They do not change what I have said, so evading discussion because of them is just that. Evasion. Flat increase in AAA power and range would lead to creating situations like in my video more common. ie. planes being killed on the scout range based on the whim of rng. Also it would make formation of 3 ships kill whole wings before they could drop the load. Considering that this would be happening regardless of skill of the CV captain or skill of the crusier captain this would quickly make carriers UP. Or maybe you think that situation in the video was perfectly healthy and that's how you envision AAA working. Cleveland for some people is the standard in how they think AAA should be. Carriers are strong, but they can be balanced without creating additional issues for them. Yes, seaplane tenders would be really cool for tier 2 and 3. I can't imagine them right now as I expect them to be even more boring that tier IV, but I would love to see something like that. Forcing carriers to play Battleships is kinda strange as their gameplay has nothing in common.

Dominico, on 10 August 2015 - 11:08 PM, said: They should be approachable but the main issue is unlike destroyer torpedoes or shells from batteries they are too easy to hit with consistently and often if there are 2 of then they can dictate the game (though this is often the fault of other cv players)* I assume the devs wanted to adress the fact that most player coming into this game will not be familiar with control scheme. Their main audience is the WoT crowd and I don't think there will be many WoT players who had even passing interest in RTS games. No matter how you look at it, RTS genre is not the most popular one and from big releases I think we have only Act of Agression coming out. They overdid it. Thing is that even with them making low tier so easy to overperform, there are still quite a lot of players who fail at it. Problem with so easy beginning is that it scares of players who potentialy are able to do good with them, as low tiers are simply too boring to engage them on any real level. IJN is the step in the right direction if you want to lower skill celling. Play USN side for a while. That wall of torps does have it's drawbacks. Langley if I remember correctly has average of around 20k while Hosho has around 40k. A lot of it is attributed to the fact that auto on USN is rather weak and fact that USN side makes less torpedo runs, but the differences between top and new players are slightly more prominent on that side. Universal loadouts are coming. More fighters for everyone. As for the maneuverability. First I would fix the direction arrow bugs and would address turning on a dime. Right now planes can start their run pretty much from anywhere and from any angle. This clearly inflates the performance as you don't have to really telegraph the attack before performing it. There is no doubt that it is not working correctly. I would wait with the other changes to aiming until those issues are dealt with. The 0.4.1 is on the horizon and we know that it will address some carrier issues (like MM or universal loadouts I mentioned earlier). Be patient, after we get our hands on it, then feedback topics will be very important. Also I really recommend going a bit higher with carriers. I do think that tier IV and V are not really representative for the whole class (low tiers are snoozefest). Also I recommend just trying Langley. Just give it a spin to give you a feel how USN spread works.

If you are aroused by a lamp I would recommend a psychiatrist. So we have finished this discusion? This is all you have to say? No counterarguments, no changing subject, no new advices for me how to play this game? Weeeeeak Edit. Nah, I will not leave that. You are too much fun. Do tell me more about this "dead zone" then. You told me that it is before the lockdown circle and it causes ignore of correction. How does video of ordering multiple corrections before the drop and finally doing correction after drop is locked not applicable.

Ciezko zaprzeczyc ze pierwsze tier-y to flaki z olejem. Jak ma kogos zaciekawic jedna eskadra atakujaca ktora porusza sie z predkoscia ponizej 100 wezlow jest ponad mna. Wraz ze wzrostem ilosci skrzydel, wzrostem predkosci i gestosci AAA robi sie ciekawiej.

Muramansk, Yubari, Warspite.No i tamte arkansas przynajmniej wiedzialy czym sa samoloty, spotkanie teraz pancernika co zareaguje na to ze do niego podchodzisz to rzadkosc. No i w arkansas nie przywalisz 3 torped z IJN, co mozesz zrobic przeciwko Miyogi i Kongo. Stacjonarne pancerniki i krazowniki to nie jest zaskakujacy widok teraz.

Oooo... Neph gral Hosho. Kiedy przebijesz sie na wyzsze tiery? Jestem naprawde ciekaw Twoich statystyk z na przyklad tiera 6. Smieszna sprawa jest ze teraz tier IV jest znacznie latwiejszy do farmienia niz na starcie gdzie byl on mimo wszystko pelny ludzmi z CBT. Nie zdziwilbym sie gdyby srednie staty z azjatyckiego serwera byl odrobine zanizonee dla niskich tierow z tego powodu bo byly tworzone kiedy ten tier mial wiecej bardziej doswiadczonych graczy.