FixCVs_Nautical_Metaphor

So I get this in-game pop-up message yesterday, says any B from the Halloween event and all US BB II tokens need to be spent before Patch 09.11 rolls around or they will automatically be converted into credits, and I seem to remember the forced conversion rate was fairly unfavourable. What's up with that? Cause the new patch comes in this week if memory serves, wheras in previous events, usually you had the whole next patch to spend those temp resources?

"make room"? Come on. All they'd need to do is maybe add a scroll bar to the Armory. <thinks> Although that may be too big of an ask of the tech company that can't even keep the icons for the current events visible in the Armory...

Then the only logical answer is to demand...

And another really bad thing about that is that people are then transferring those "tactics" to battles where there are no CVs. This is especially pronounced on the NA server where the CV problem is even worse. No more searching for openings, no trying to find an in, no flanking, no cap support - just "mikado tactics" ("first one to move, loses"). That's what CVs brought to this game, that's what they constantly train players to do: "Don't show initiative because you only get punished for it." A force for conformity and herd mentality.

The CVs also take over the meta in randoms whenever they are there. Not even the most ridiculous Russian paper ships took over the meta in quite the same way. Even against them there was and is always some form of counterplay. Battles with CVs on the other hand might as well be taking place in a completely different game. Outstanding matches like this one https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l2gLo287TYY simply cannot, do not occur in that game. Because whenever there are carriers, there are just two players playing, or enjoying themseves at any rate, while all others are reduced to meaningless extras like in this other recent video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hFTkdm4-tiY&amp;t=69s And there are carriers in 50 to 100% of battles, depending on the tier, except for Tiers I, II and IX. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/11G0IGENL2SOSoJx8yP6Sz_RhVIk0hovHasSaWKiw1KM/edit#gid=1867916425 Which is way too much by any measure. And what else in heaven's name do you think caused the drain of decent DD players? And how can anyone complain about the player base getting dumber and dumber but fail to see that they are merely using different words to describe the exact same kind of brain drain for BB and cruiser players, caused by dumbing down the game with completely OP CVs that have AP bombs and AP rockets as well as the absence of adequate DD players, in turn caused by CVs in the first place? Domino theory in action.

It's slightly beside the point and derailing the whole thread but what about historical dispersion, rate-of-fire and visibility then?

Of course it was. That's just how I got my Smaland., and loads of other people, too. And I would never have dreamed of resetting lines, had it not been for the Free XP buy. Compared to the CV rework, it's just another very minor annoyance, not even approaching the level of scandalousness of funny Russian Kreml and Stalingrad and Kuznetsov. There will not even be a shart, let alone a shitstorm.

As per the spreadsheet, mine gets just 52% on the EU server. But that is Tier X which gets more CVs anyway. Even on the NA server, it's just 68%. The difference is that I'm completely happy to play Halland without CVs since the torps are great and the stealth is adequate. Friesland, not so much. And Benham is completely ruined if the enemy CV is even semi-conscious.

Wot, no torps? STONE THE HERETIC!!1

Well, I've been saying for some time we should just crowdfund our own ship game. Shouldn't take any longer than waiting for WG to implement easy, logical solutions like, say, a Demount All Signals button... and couldn't be botched any worse either.

Hi there F2P players, possibly the most interesting part of the Black Friday sales promotion event are the discounts and bonuses concerning the tech tree ships! https://worldofwarships.eu/en/news/sales-and-events/black-friday-2020/#discounts-and-bonuses Of note, there is a 15% credit discount for high tier American ships, which is 5% more than the regular clan player discount. I don't know if they've done that before but this is the highest discount I've ever seen for high tier ships. Since events credit discounts do not stack with the regular clan player discount, it usually does not make sense for clan players to postpone the purchase of high tier ships in order to wait for a discount event to come round. But in this case, it does! So if you happen to have unlocked any Tier VIII-X US Navy vessels but put off buying them for some reason, this may be a good time to do so - not the least Black Friday also includes a hefty 50% credit discount for upgrades! And the upgrade discount is not limited to US navy vessels. So until Dec 4th, you save 3.437.500 credits over the regular price when fully upgrading Tier XI and X ships of any nationality right now.

Hey but I have found a way of rationalizing the purchase of the Tier VIII "Infernal" camo!!1 It will speed up the grind through the carrier-infested Tier VIII! And for the equivalent of only 11,250,000 credits. Whereas Tier IX is where you don't mind spending extra time. In fact Tier IX is the tier you want to spend as much time as possible, since it gets the fewest carrier battles.

On that exact page, which I looked up right before posting, it says, and I copy and paste here, "10% discount to the price of researchable Tier IX-X ships." Sadly that's where I stopped reading. Needless complication, thy name is Wargaming.

OT credits, the cost of the Tier XI "Infernal" perma camo that you can obtain for 300,000 "B" from the Big Hunt key battles event equals 22,500,000 credits, which you could straight up buy for the same amount of "B". Twenty-two million. That is the order of magnitude of one fully upgraded Tier X ship.

You know, if you're gonna have monsters, or even just game animals in the game, it would really help in the "fun and engagement" department if they demonstrated some kind of comprehensible behavior instead of just wallowing around slowly so they can be farmed even by the biggest potatoes. You know, like hunting, attacking or fleeing. The bots in the Hunt for the Filth were much better in this respect. Sometimes I think even the Co-Op bots are better.

Are the current matchmaking rules known in full and where can I look them up?

Here's an idea to reward teamplay more adequatly: Don't just award XP for the act of capping but also give the players who capped the caps some XP for the cap points those caps scored for the team. Whenever a team wins on points, at the very least in Domination mode, at least those players who directly made it possible to score those points should get a bigger share. To reward those players who supported those caps, maybe some share of XP could be awarded in relation to their proximity to the cap, and the proximity of their targets to the cap. That would reward those players more who actually helped attaining the objective, either by pushing it or shooting enemy targets who were in turn pushing it. One theoretical downside of this would be that it would not reward flanking. Not rewarding potentially beneficial behavior is essentially the same as punishing it. However, flanking is mostly dumb and/or impossible these days anyway because aircraft carriers.

Yes well maybe but how exactly does it help them? I mean they now, too, have to remember to first set the speed, then set the map points, or else delete all their course planning with a flick of the throttle.

If I knew that, I wouldn't need to ask, now would I.

The way I remember it from three years ago, used to be that early in the morning you got some of the best games against some of the best players since that was the time when some of the more active gamer student unicorns woke up and got in a few games before going to uni. Of course that was also the time when you got some of the best games in the dark of night since that was when all the slacker students played to procrastinate instead of doing their term papers. I guess what the OP is describing is just a symptom of hip teens and tweens, such as they ever were attracted to this game, finally moving away.

I wouldn't call it boring per se, but it is my impression that the game does not easily lend itself to casting. For one thing, it's not easy for the commentators to put the camera where the action is at precisely the right moment. Usually they are a bit late and several potentially interesting things are happening at the same time. They just don't have a swarm of camera people, directors and technical assistants to do their bidding in the background, which is what TV networks use when broadcasting sports events and which is a major operation. And of course the build-up and positioning phase looks like nothing. Until I started playing clan battles myself, it all meant very little to me. Only after trying it myself, I could begin to appreciate it. But even so, it doesn't come close to holding my attention like a real sports game could, even though I am not really into sports.

If these streamers were really bothered by CVs, they would actively resist. Instead, all they do is rant and complain, which is good for WG's business and for theirs.

Watch it directly after watching the Q&A from one and a half years ago I posted directly above it. Only that way can you truly appreciate the game-balancing genius that is WG.

It occurs to me this might be a good time to look back at what WG reps said at that CC summit Q&A in St Petersburg last year, and maybe consider how well it all held up. Just a little retrospective. How do you expect to balance aircraft carriers? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIBAc6jkPPY&t=545s How do you plan to maintain flanking and solo playing instead of blobbing up as the only viable tactic while at the same time also making it possible for the carrier to enjoy his gameplay? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIBAc6jkPPY&t=679s In patch 0.8.5, it seems you are insisting to maintain the concept of having AA with a continuous damage per second (DPS), so it almost always guarantees at least one or two planes are shot down in an attack, even if you attack the most unskilled player. Up to which point is the player still playing the game, with his skills? At which point does the game start to play the player? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIBAc6jkPPY&t=778s Not only does AA get destroyed, it is also especially fragile. This leads to yet more more passive gameplay as players avoid fights with certain ships to avoid losing too much AA and be farmed by the carrier even more easily. Also since the Defensive AA consumable is limited in number, I hesitate to use it to help out team mates but save it for myself. How do you plan to address this issue? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIBAc6jkPPY&t=1060s Have you ever considered to let the Repair Party consumable restore some AA that was lost in attacks? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIBAc6jkPPY&t=1180s Formerly very strong AA ships like Atlanta are now complete garbage. Do you have ideas of how to address that? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIBAc6jkPPY&t=1230s High-tier German cruisers used to have solid if not outstanding AA before the rework. They still do, but the range is rather short, even some destroyers have a longer AA range. Why is that? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIBAc6jkPPY&amp;t=3924s On the other servers, CVs have been capped to one per side. Why not on the NA server? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIBAc6jkPPY&amp;t=4050s

It occurs to me this might be a good time to bring up that Q&A in St Petersburg once again. How do you feel about the carrier implementation in Ranked? Was it a success? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIBAc6jkPPY&amp;t=4255s You are aware of the saving stars issue? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIBAc6jkPPY&amp;t=4304s Talking about Ranked, which is supposed to be a (step toward) a competitive mode - why introduce rental ships, and why then deny them camouflages? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIBAc6jkPPY&amp;t=4424s The saving-a-star system in Ranked is based on base experience earned, which means it is largely damage-focused while valuable team play like scouting or smoking up team mates not only isn't rewarded but actually hurts your chances of saving your star. Are you considering to increase the XP reward of team play more strongly in the future? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIBAc6jkPPY&amp;t=4634s The algorithm that awards the base XP seems flawed in that it rewards mostly damage done and hardly anything else. You can have a huge impact on the battle in other ways like spotting, scouting etc but it largely ignored in terms of the final base XP tally. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIBAc6jkPPY&amp;t=4854s Have you considered reducing the focus on damage a bit and rewarding other aspects of Battleships gameplay, like the amount of potential damage? To encourage more active and better gameplay? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIBAc6jkPPY&amp;t=4924s Have you considered showing on the scoreboard the precise amount of XP/credits that resulted from each of the the different factors in order to encourage better gameplay? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIBAc6jkPPY&amp;t=4994s Not that Ranked bothered me a fraction as much as CVs, mind, on which they also did a fair bit of waffling. But I shall post those links in the CV thread.