Uglesett

Well... you can. Sort of. That's one of the nice things about software, as long as you have a half-decent version control system it's usually fairly easy to revert changes. And if your software is sufficiently well structured, you can even revert changes and then fairly easily reintroduce other, unrelated changes that have been made at a later stage.

I see where you're coming from. But as a software developer myself... Actually implementing something like that would almost unavoidably be the sort of kludged-up cluster that I wouldn't wish on my worst enemy. You can branch the software and have two different clients with different CV core mechanics. That's fine. But just branching the CV code and having basically two different branches of the same functionality in one application.... that's the sort of Lovecraftian nightmare that makes programmers scream in their sleep and wet their beds.

Well, I can't deny that the thought of Willow (of Buffy the Vampire Slayer fame) bending over had a definite appeal in my younger days...

Learn what "dodge tanking" means, ffs. But were you in range to support anyone else with AA fire while you were doing it? Good luck against high tier BB AP. I mean, sure, it works very well in ships like Henri IV and Zao that are built for that sort of thing. In CLs with foil armour and low velocity guns it's... not super effective. I don't think the Omaha has a 12 km long range AA aura... We were talking about supporting against aircraft, not against DDs... And you have yet to significantly play any of the ships and tiers where it's necessary. So why do you expect people to start doing it more?

Dude, go back and read what you yourself wrote. You're saying "just dodge tank", and I'm pointing out that you can't because you'll get spanked. The alternative to not sitting in cover is very often to not be useful at all, it's not to go gung-ho open water gunboating and hoping that everything will be alright. https://forum.worldofwarships.eu/topic/111990-surveillance-radar-interface-improvement-flooding/ The short of it: Radar gets buffed range and duration, but a time delay before radared ships are rendered on teammates' screens (it shows up on minimap immediately, though, so you can start turning your turrets right away). It is marginally less useful for the radar ship's teammates, but the radar ship itself basically gets even more time to murder the DD. Overall, a net buff. Well duh. Because being in the open, near objectives, in a lightly armoured cruiser is a recipe for getting spanked. And that really only works on the lower and mid tiers. In something like the Neptune, just staying in the open in smoke is fairly risky because at those tiers you meet a lot more high accuracy BBs that can blind fire you. And if you keep moving and don't stay close to the cap, how long does it take before you suddenly wonder out of supporting AA range of that DD that's trying to cap? No, that's just being lucky with your opponents. Especially if you actually did that while staying close enough to objectives to support the ships in it with AA fire...

https://forum.worldofwarships.eu/topic/110892-preliminary-analysis-of-cv-skillsupgrades/

They can still do that. And torp drops against smoke also still work. They don't need a third weapon that's specialized at murdering DDs without any support. And I'm pointing out why you're wrong. It promotes hanging even further back than today. Which means the DDs will end up doing the same. Well, good luck, because they're buffing it. Dude. Seriously. You said it yourself earlier, radar is mostly an issue from T8 upwards. Come back when you've unlocked the Neptune. ... Dude, seriously? Did you just try to justify that people should stay in the open in a lightly armoured cruiser by saying that it works for you when you do it in a battleship? Except of course that a lot of ships in this game are close to useless without of it.

That's my entire point. CV's shouldn't be good against all other ship types. They should have their limits like the other three classes, and one traditional limitation that didn't need to change was that they weren't very good at dealing damage to DDs. You're missing my point. The cruiser can't stay protected while at the same time projecting AA to cover the cap. Because the cover blocks AA fire. Both tactics that only work when you keep your distance open to enemy surface combatants. Smoke is countered by radar, so you need to keep distance to enemy radar ships, and dodge-tanking only works when you stay far enough away from the ships shooting at you to have time to react. Any semi-active cruiser player knows this already. Island hugging is problematic for reasons mentioned above - it restricts your AA and gives CVs easy attacks. And cruisers in open caps are just as suicidal as ever. In essence, cruisers need to stay far back to survive. AA that doesn't help until the planes clear the island, in which case it doesn't have time to cause major damage. @El2aZeR shows off some great examples of how to pull this off on their youtube channel. Well, I certainly wouldn't mind going back to the days of stealth AA, but I'm not sure CV players will appreciate it. Which doesn't really bother me, but whatever. Erm. I'm not the best or most experienced player by any means, but when it comes to higher tier cruiser play, I think I can safely tell you to come back later.

Ah, yes. The inane inspirational quote. A classical response from people with little analytical sense. And sure, as a philosophy it sounds good on the surface, until you actually take the time to think it through and realize the implications of following it in other, more complex aspects of life than interactive entertainment. Getting harassed at work? "Bend and adapt". Sexual assault? "Bend and adapt"... yeah, it doesn't sound quite as inspirational now, does it? And can I just point out that going "you know what, this game isn't fun anymore, I'll play something else instead" is a perfectly "willow-y" response to game-breaking changes? It is, however, one that isn't very conducive to WG's financial future.

Doubtful. I doubt they will be able to have rocket planes in the game in a form that is of any kind of use and still have DDs be playable in a game with a CV. And it is not necessary for the CV to have access to weapons that hard counter all three other classes. There is no gameplay reason why the rocket planes cannot simply be removed. That was always one of the balancing factors pre 0.8.0 - sure, DDs didn't have terribly good defences against aircraft, but at the same time CV weapons weren't for the most part that good against DDs. Torps could usually be dodged, even cross drops (with some of the more sluggish DDs as exceptions), and dive bombers with their large spread tended to be at least fairly random in how much damage they could do. How? How do you, in this meta "protect the DD"? I mean, with the RTS CVs, you could actually have a DD flank or push forwards into a cap, and your own CV could protect it with their fighters. What tools does the team have to protect a DD now, aside from forming a blob and having the DD hide behind the skirts of the cruisers? May I point out that AA in 0.8.0 follows line of sight rules? I mean, let's analyze this a bit: -The CL/CA needs to follow close enough to a DD to actually contribute meaningfully to its air defence. Not just "keep it within its long range AA aura" as was the case pre 0.8.0, but actually stick close enough to do non-negligible damage to attackers before they're finished dumping their load. -It needs to do this without getting blapped by BBs, which means it needs to keep cover between itself and the enemy team -This cover unfortunately works both ways, and can be used by the enemy CV to protect their planes. -And, a good CV can easily attack cruisers hiding behind islands by using the terrain to mask their aircraft's approach.

Yeah. If WG have any sense, at the very least they'll give free respecs and upgrade demounts with every major patch for the next couple of updates.

I'm going to try it out just to see. But to be honest, it looks pretty boring and repetitive, so I doubt CVs are going to be my new favourite class.

Of course it's arguable. How do you define killing someone quickly? One thing is the average time it takes to kill someone, another is the variance in how much time it takes. The old style CVs can indeed kill "more quickly" in terms of being potentially capable of doing a lot of damage in a very short amount of time, but even the most skilled CV player will acknowledge that there's also a lot of variance. If the opponent jukes you out, you end up doing little or zero damage, and have to wait a long rearm cycle before you can try again. The new CVs can with rocket planes very reliably and consistently do damage to DDs without them having much room for counterplay. New CVs will have a lot less variance in how long it takes them to wipe out all the DDs on the opposing team, and are less affected by their target's skill level. Sure, the old CVs could occasionally do it more quickly, given a bit of luck, but over a large number of games the picture will be a lot more distributed. Meanwhile, the new ones will be a lot more consistent in their time to kill.

Yes please. If they start working on it now, it might even be ready by the time DDs become playable again.

You're getting hung up on the "long range" wording. Large calibre AA, that which makes up the long and medium range AA is now dodgeable. Unless the DD is hiding between other ships, it's entirely possible to spot them while staying well outside the effect of any short-range, continuous damage AA.

I'm not comparing the new CVs to anything. WG are introducing a new class to the game. That class is idiotically OP.

I don't need to have played the old ones to realize the new are stupidly overpowered. I have played against the RTS CVs. They don't bother me any more than any other class. The new ones... let's just say I seriously doubt any non-CV class will be enjoyable for a long time.

Much disappointment your future holds, young padawan.

Hammertime!

Relax guys. Everyone the quick bloom reset is useful for is going to be effectively permaspotted by CVs for the next couple of months anyway, so what's the harm in waiting?

Erm...

Have to agree with MrConway here, I don't see how this is bad news. It's basically as good as can be expected. 0.8.0 is in a finished state, and they couldn't change it now without basically postponing it even further, and even that may be a bit late. But we're getting the good functionality back as soon as possible.

As I said, the solution is to cut down on activity on the live server when really important stuff is being tested on the PTS. Besides, some periods without heavy stuff happening on the live server would probably be welcome, tbh. It would give people some time to play neglected low tier lines and explore what the game has to offer.

But if the live server is boring, then that's the perfect opportunity to try the PTS. That's the point. I mean, if you were grinding the PEF event, when the hell were you supposed to have time to play the PTS? It doesn't matter what the rewards are for playing the PTS if you have to choose between finishing a major event on live or playing the PTS. Okay, if they'd handed out the PEF early as a reward for playing the PTS then maybe, but otherwise it's no competition. You can hand out as many camos and speshul signals as you like, it's not going to change it.