Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'rework'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Forum
    • English Speaking Forum
    • Deutschsprachige Community
    • Polska Społeczność
    • Česká a slovenská komunita
    • Communauté francophone
    • Comunità Italiana
    • Comunidad de habla española
    • Türkçe Topluluk
  • Mod Section
    • Rules, Announcements and General Discussion (English)
    • Modding Tutorials, Guides and Tools (English)
    • Interface Mods
    • Visual Mods
    • Sound Mods
    • Modpacks
    • Other Mods and Programs
    • Archive
  • Historical Section

Calendars

  • Community Calendar
  • This Day in History

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


AIM


MSN


Website URL


ICQ


Yahoo


Jabber


Skype


Twitter


Location


Interests

Found 55 results

  1. Hallo, dies ist der Versuch, die Verbesserungsideen zum CV-Rework zu sammeln, die in diesem andern Thread ziemlich untergehen: Daher wollen wir hier nur die Ideen sammeln, bitte keine allzu ausufernden gar keine Diskussionen dazu und kein Hickhack, wer blöd ist und wer nicht !!! (EDIT: siehe Postings von floribe2000 = lieber gar keine Diskussionen, wahrscheinlich ufert es sonst eh immer aus; leider unterstützt dieses Forum keine einklappbaren Unterthreads, sonst wären Rückfragen leichter handelbar) Edit (floribe2000): Keine Diskussionen, da diese extrem schnell eskalieren bzw. ins Off Topic abdriften (siehe CV-Diskussionen). Diskussionen bitte im allgemeinen CV Thread. !!! Wer eine gute Idee dort drüben hatte - bitte gern hier nochmal schreiben !!! @_Riko_ hat einen guten Anfang gemacht! Ich zitier ihn hier mal (weiß nicht, wie Zitieren zwischen verschiedenen Threads geht). Also, er schrieb: Meines Erachtens funktioniert das jetzige Gameplay der CV nicht, weil die Spielweise der CV sich zu stark unterscheidet von den anderen Klassen, die sich alle ähnlich spielen. Darum wäre mein Vorschlag, die Spielweise der CV an die der anderen Klassen anzugleichen. Das könnte als ein Beispiel so aussehen: 1. CV selbst bleibt wie er ist. 2. Die Raketenflieger werden gestrichen. 3. Die Geschwindigkeit der Flugzeuge darf 70 Knoten nicht überschreiten. 4. Man hat nur 8 Flugzeuge an Bord, - 3 Torpedobomber - 3 Sturzbomber - 1 Aufklärer - 1 Jäger 5. Alle Flugzeuge haben einen TP Schnitt von 10 000 HP 6. Man erhöht die Kontrolle über die Flakabwehr, es soll möglich sein, effektiv der Flak auszuweichen. ( mindestens 50% Chance ) 7. Man fliegt nach Angriffen manuell zum CV zurück. 8. Flugzeuge an Deck bekommen eine Reparaturmannschaft 9. Aufklärer können nur Spotten ( fürs ganze Team und nur in einem bestimmten Radius, wenn sie ihn verlassen, gehen die Schiffe wieder zu ) 10. Torpdeo- und Sturzkampfbomber können nur für sich spotten 11. Jäger können Supporten, sonst nur andere Flugzeuge bekämpfen. ( hier wäre WoWp Ähnlichkeit ) 12. Flugzeuge, die abschossen werden, werden nicht ersetzt. Im Paket nimmt so die Frequenz der Lufteinsätze ab, die Wertigkeit der Flugzeuge nimmt zu, das Einsatzspektrum wird erhöht und ebenfalls die Kontrolle über die Flugzeuge. Jetzt muss man natürlich die Schäden balancen. Würde man das so machen, wäre man eher in der Spielweise der anderen Klassen als jetzt. Beispiele sind nur grob. Nochmal ich, Chassadhi: Am meisten gefallen mir ja die Torpdeo-Bomber aus Punkt 10! Ist das der Duft für harte Seemänner??? Willst auch Du bei jeder Meerjungfrau gut ankommen? - Dann nimm auch Du das neue ‹Torpdeo› - der Duft, der Meerjungfrauen provoziert!
  2. I keep wondering if there is a way to Implement CVs into the Game without them being Insanely Overpowered or them effectively just being a Guided Artillery. And alot of Ideas are there. But thanks to just how different CVs are from other Warships it is pretty Difficult for any of these Ideas to really be Good. But one Idea has actually lately Grown on me quite a bit. So now I would like to hear some Opinions on it on wether it might work and be better than the current version of CVs and maybe Adjust it to make an Actual Suggestion for it in the Suggestions Topic. The Idea is to Reverse the Roles of Fighters and Bombers in the current System using older RTS Elements as well as the New Submarine Elements and CV Rework Elements to Create a Sort of 2nd CV Rework. Effectively. The CV Player instead of getting Bomber Squadrons which then have Fighter Consumables. Will get Fighter Squadrons that have Bomber Consumables. 1. Air to Air Combat. Fighter Squadrons would come with Machineguns, Machinecannons and Rockets to Fight Enemy Aircraft. These would each work Differently a bit. Machineguns would be the Base Weapon with most Ammo Reserves before Requriing to Reload. And the Job of the Player would be to keep the Squadrons Machineguns Pointing on the Enemy Squadron while Firing. Leading the Enemy Movements and trying to Stay on target at a very Close Range. Machinecannons would be the Stronger Variant of that. But have extremely Limited Ammunition before needing to Reload. The Job of the Player would be the Same as with Machineguns. But Cannons would have a Slightly Better Range. And Finally Rockets. Unlike Machineguns and Machinecannons. The Rockets would be more Similar to DDs Fighting Enemy DDs with Torps. They would Fly through the Air and thus would need to be Fired with according Lead and Prediction unless its Point Blank Range where just like with DDs it might end with mutual destruction. To make Air Combat more Interesting the Fighter Squadron would not only get the Speed Boost/Breaks and Left Right Maneuvers. But would also receive the ability to use F and V to increase or lower Altitude. Higher Altitude of course Reducing Damage taken from AA as only Heavy AA can reach there. But of course also not being able to Fight Enemy Aircraft that are at lower Altitude. Meaning that above their own Ships The CV Player might prefer to Fight at lower Altitude while above Enemy Ships the CV Player will be more happy to Fight at higher Altitudes. Pls note. Reload on the Weapons will Require the CV Player to use the R Key (for other Ships Damage Control but for CV it will then be Return Squadron) and return to the Carrier. He himself will Return instantly of course and can Immediately Jump back into Action with his remaining Fighters Forming a New Squadron. Also. The Different Weapons can only be used 1 at a Time. Using the 1-2-3 Keys. Meaning 1 is Machineguns, 2 is Cannons and 3 is Rockets. Which the Player has to Choose which to Fire. (Similar to how Normal Ships have to Choose their Weapons as well) 2. Bomber Consumables. The Bomber Consumables are Fairly Straight Forward. The Player would get 2 Squadron Consumables. Which would be Dive/Level Bombers and Torpedo Bombers. The Number of uses as well as the actual Squadrons Spawned by it being Decided by the CV in Question. The Consumable is used by Flying over a Target and Pressing the Button for using it. After that the Bomber Squadron will take off from the Carrier and Fly to the Point where the Consumable was Used. To then Attack whatever Enemy Ship it Finds inside the Area. If there is no Visible Target the Squadron will Circle there for 2 Minutes before it Returns to the Carrier. The 2 Bomber Consumables can be used Together. Meaning that if the CV Player wants he can Send both a Torpedo Bomber and a Dive Bomber Squadron to the Designated Area to Attack whatever Ship they find there. As the Consumable is depleted regardless of Success or Losses the Player does not need to worry about AA aside from AA being so Strong that the Bombers wont Reach there. Of course current Heavy AA would need to be Nerfed for this. As the AI Bombers wont make any Evasive Maneuvers like a Player does to avoid Heavy AA. Unlike the Player Squadrons currently. These Consumable Squadrons however would Drop the entire Load at once. And not in Single Wings per Drop. So a Hakuryu assuming its not changed for this. Would drop 12 Torpedoes at once which is Pretty Hefty. But since its an AI Drop it would be mostly Evadable and AA is certain to Shoot down some Aircraft as well. So the Player actually likely only be hit by 1 or 2 Torpedoes or might even evade it alltogether if he sees it coming early enough and turns his nose into the Torpedoes. As Bombers will only Attack Targets in a 4km Radius (So 8km Diamter +2km due to Diameter of Squadron Patrolling in Circles in the Center of the Area) of the Consumable being used. And DDs often only have 2.6km Air Spotting Range. The Player might be Required to Spot a DD for the Bombers to Attack it. As the Bombers wont Attack the DD unless they see it. At the same time however. The CV Player might use HE Dive Bombers to Spawn them ontop of a Capture Circle. And thus Block that Capture Circle because if the DD tries to take it he will move into the Diver Bombers which will then not only Spot him but also Attack him. 3. Air to Ground Combat. The Fighters if they Drop to the Lowest Altitude will be able to Attack Enemy Ships with Machineguns, Cannons and Rockets. However. Fighters cannot Deal Direct Damage to Ships. Instead they will be doing Module Damage and Potentially Set Fires using Rockets. Of course being at lowest Altitude also means that they will take heavy AA Damage as they are completely Exposed to AA. So this wont be useful if the Enemy has alot of Powerful AA in the Area. By the Way. Submrines are currently Considered Modules by the Game. So while other Ships will only Take Module Damage from HE Splash Damage while their HP wont be Touched unless it Hits and Penetrate the Ship Directly. Submarines will take Damage from HE Splash Radius. The Same Mechanic in the Game also means that these Fighters can cause Direct Damage to a Submarine. Meaning that using Rockets. The Fighter Squadrons might be able to Cause Direct Damage to a Submarine when they Catch it on the Surface. This Includes Cannons. Machineguns wont have any Damage Potential against Ships as they can even Penetrate Superstructure for most part. Cannons will be able to cause Fires in Superstructure for Larger Ships and on some DDs. Due to having Explosive Rounds they will also Cause Micro Damage to Modules. However. Since any Damage caused to Modules can Disable it. This means that even tough the Actual Damage to the Module is completely Neglectable for anything beyond lighter AA Modules. The High Amount of Hits you might Potentially Face when a CV Player Peppers your Modules can lead to them being Disabled very Reliably. Rockets can cause Fires to the entire Ship using Explosive Damage and will of course also Splash Modules like Rudder and Engine if they are hit by it. 4. Rewards. As the Primary Objective of the CV is Spotting and Causing Damage to Enemy Planes. Its main Damage Counter will not Show Ship Damage but instead Air Damage. Meaning the main Damage Counted for CVs will be Damage Caused to Enemy Planes. With Damage to Enemy Ships being Counted as the Secondary Damage (where other Ships currently get Air Damage Counting) What do you think. You think this might work ? You think it might be Fun for the CV Player while also being much better Balanced for the other Players ? Or you think nah. I would rather have the current CVs which will pretty much always be Overpowered as otherwise nobody will play them ? ^^
  3. Spartans_Emperor_Wrath

    CV to the rescue!

    Flugzeugträger gehören zu Seegefechten. Sie zu entfernen wäre zu drastisch und würde Spielspaß dieser Marinelegenden nehmen. Die Kunst ist es, speziell für WoWs, diese Schiffklasse zu Balancen. Nach dem Durchlesen mancher Kommentare hier... kommt nun meiner. Die Umsetzung könnte das Spiel retten, ist halt mit Arbeit verbunden. Flugzeugträger sind die Stärkste Schiffsklasse, nicht umsonst haben sie die Schlachtschiffe abgelöst. In WoWs fühlen sich Flugzeugträger jedoch falsch an. Egal ob man selbst in einem sitzt oder in ein CV Match geworfen wird. Das Rework ist schlecht. Viel mit denken und vorraussehen hat das nichts zu tun. Überarbeitet das Rework nochmal. Und zwar so, das die Ganzen Insel Camper und die DDs (vorallem die DDs!) wieder normal an ein Match rangehen, selbst wenn ein CV im Match ist. Mit dem kommenden Updates werden die Uboote ins Spiel gerufen, ist ein anderes Thema, aber diese Operieren im dreidimensionalen Raum. Wieso sollte der Himmel nur eine Ebene haben? Die Erste Ebene sollte die Angriffshöhe sein, so wie wir sie jetzt kennen. Hier nehmen Flugzeuge den meisten Schaden von gegnerischen Flaks. Nur auf dieser Ebene ist es möglich Schiffe zu attackieren. Die 2te Ebene, könnte in den Wolken sein. Sichtbarkeit der Flugzeuge sollte reduziert sein, aber auch die Sicht der Flugzeuge. Durch interferenzen, könnte sogar die Map "einfrieren". Wetter wie Sturm beeinflussen Flugzeuge sehr und können sogar, durch Blitzeinschlag oder gefrorene Komponenten zum Absturz führen. Radarkreuzer sollten in der Lage sein mit dem Verbrauchsmaterial "Radar" diese zu Orten und mit Langstreckenflak unter Beschuss zu nehmen. (Wie in den Filmen!) Die 3te Ebene sollte über den Wolken sein. Hier sind Flugzeuge vor Flak sicher. Und auch vor allen Wetter auswirkungen. Jedoch kann man nicht einfach wieder so runter und Schiffe bombardieren. Jeder Wechsel in die Ebenen sollte eine gewisse Zeit brauchen, überspielt mit einer Animation. Man sollte mit seinen Flugzeugen jagt auf Flugzeuge des gegnerischen Cvs machen. Wie Geil wäre es bitte wenn über den Wolken eine Flugzeugeschlacht stattfindet und die abgeschossen Flugzeuge durch die Wolkendecke ins Wasser klatschen. Das Starten und Landen von Flugzeugen sollte mehr Zeit beanspruchen. So wie es auch war, stehen die Flugzeuge IM Hanger. Der Kapitän entscheidet wie wann die Squads starten. Das würde das Problem beheben, das DDs in den ersten 30 sekunden gespottet werden. Jeder Squad sollte von Jägern begleitet werden, diese könnten dann bei einem Attackrun von zB. Torpedobombern mit auf das Schiff schiessen, keinen Schaden machen, einfach für das Auge. Jedoch sollten dieses Jäger sich als Schutz mit, vom Gegner gestarteten Jäger, bekämpfen. Als CV Kapitän ist es wirklich ein gutes Gefühl wenn ein Attackrun deftigen Schaden anrichtet. Für alle anderen nicht. Vorallem die DDs. Um den CV Kapitän sein Erfolgserlebnis nicht zu nehmen indem man alles zu Tode nerft, wieso sollte der CV nicht in der Lage sein Unterstützungsflugzeuge für seine Allierten zu holen? Ein Healdrop für schwerattackierte Schiffe, Nebelwerfer Flieger, Hydrobojien, Deepcharge Flugzeuge (für Uboote später).Da könnt ihr mal ein paar Geschichtsbücher aufschlagen und mal nachschauen was sich die Militärs der Welt so einfallen lassen haben. Und vllt ändert ihr das Belohnungssystem des CVs. Weniger für Schaden an Schiffen, mehr an Schaden und Abschüssen von gegnerischen Flugzeugen. Das alles erfordert nätürlich eine Grundintelligenz. Aber das ist ok! Nicht alle Klassen müssen von JEDEM beherscht werden. Ich entschuldige mich für den eventuellen Grammatik- Gore! Bitte schreibt eure Meinung darunter und macht diesen Post, wenn er euch zuspricht so bekannt wie irgendmöglich! Euer X_Con
  4. Furius_Marius

    Manual secondaries rework idea

    Hello everybody! Probably this topic was already commented. But I really think this captain ability needs a rework. Nowadays is only "working" for very few and selected ships. For the rest is just not worth it at all. Especially for mid-tier ships. Here is my idea: Manual Fire Control for Secondary ArmamentTightens dispersion of secondary batteries.-15% for Tier I ships. -20% for Tier II Ships -25% for tier III Ships -30% for tier IV Ships -35% for tier V Ships -45% for tier VI Ships -55% for tier VII Ships-60% for Tier VIII-X ships.BONUS When manually selected target only. Without manual select the secondaries fire without the bonus dispersion. When manual selected the secondaries that can't shoot at selected target will fire at another possible target without bonus. What do you think?
  5. A strategy for countering CVs has been uncovered and the unicum destroyer main gets to hear it...
  6. Hello guys, just wanna give you some hints and tricks, which could help you, when you decided to play the CV rework. Trying to make just short descriptions. Note: I'm seeing this from an IJN view and this is not a complete guide. Table of content Autopilot with CV and AAA AP bombing with different impact angles Aiming with AP - dive bomber against light armored vessels (depends also on the AP bombs) Aiming with AP - dive bomber against heavy armored vessels My general advice for AP bombing Accelerating and slowing down Turning Keyboard and Mouse usage Using Fighters Autopilot with CV and AAA I recommend to chose a zig zag course with your carrier, which makes aiming harder for enemy aircraft attacks. Also switching the AA side is recommend. The Screenshot in the 'spoiler' shows, that the CV moves in zig zag to the east, while switching the AAA to the right side (to the south) Edit: I don't recommend that really anylonger, since the sector change, which "only" increases the continuous aa dps. Another tactic: Since fires and floods last very short, the threat of a burning flight deck is minimized. That encourages to go close with the team. A few km behind the last bb of the team could give some extra AA power. I wouldn't choose a sector with that tactic, because there is too much change, and the CV player is too inflexible for changing sectors. AP bombing with different impact angles The angle of the impact of the bombs depends on the angle of the plane. Take a look at the screenshot in the 'spoiler'. Steep angles of the plane leads to a better impact angle, thus thicker armor could be penetrated, while a shallow angle won't penetrate thick armor, but has the advantage not to over-penetrate thin armor. Aiming with AP - dive bomber against light armored vessels (depends also on the AP bombs) The first example is about a stationary Cruiser and where to start the dive. Look at the grey crosshair. The grey crosshair mostly shows, where the dive bomber will be in the dive stage, thus aiming in front of the cruiser would lead, that the stage after the dive would be directly above the cruiser. The next screenshot shows how it looks like, if you're above the crusier. The planes are not steep angled, since the dive is already over. Now showing an example for aiming at a moving cruiser, where to start the dive. In many cases you will have to accelerate, since cruisers are pretty fast. And another screenshot: this shows, that AP bombs penetrate dds (Kagero). Note: Not all AP bombs work against all light armor vessels, especially T10 AP bombers have a high penetration capability. Aiming with AP - dive bomber against heavy armored vessels Against heavy armored targets it's recommended to drop the bomb while the dive. I'm showing you a screenshot, when to start the dive against a stationary bb. The grey crosshair is directly above the BB. The next screenshot shows how it looks like, when to release the bomb. The planes are in a steep angle. Now an example how to aim at a moving BB. It just needs a little bit lead, look at the grey chrosshair, it is aimed at the tip/nose of the BB, since they're slow, and the BB will be at that point, when you start the dive. My general advice for AP bombing Generally I use the AP bombs only against larger cruisers and battle ships, because the ap bomb mechanic and penetration capability is pretty hard to figure out. The Shokaku can dive bomb dds, while the Hakuryu can't. Also I had the experience, that I divebombed a Buffalo multiple times and got only overpens, but in the training room, shallow or steep bombing - both lead to citadells. So it's still somehow confusing. Accelerating and slowing down When the planes are at max speed or slowed down, it will affect the dive. If a target is close, and the squad is accelerated, the squad will often shoot over the target, so it's more recommended to approach a target with normal spead, or slow down. With more experience speeding up can be a pretty good tactic. Turning The turning circle is smaller, when slowling down. This is pretty good for Divebomber and sometimes for Torpedobomber. Attackplanes often need some more range and a longer approach. So in case of the attack planes after an attack run - instead of a small turn - I accelerate to get farer away. Dive bomber = Slow down and turn Torpedo bomber = Depends more on situation Attackplanes = Accelerate and turn then Keyboard and Mouse usage Keyboard is mostly for maneuvering (avoiding aa), turning and coarse movements. While you should use the mouse for aiming. The mouse control reacts only in a cone of ~45°, outside of this cone area, turning with mouse is disabled. Beside that, the right mouse is for looking around, but it behaves in the same way like it would be with guns, thus the airplanes will move to the spot, where you aimed, before you hold down the right button. Using Fighters Generally don't use fighter directly on enemy strike planes, they take too long for the engage. Use them like a smoke to cover a helpess mate (especially dds in caps). You can also fly a head and place the Fighter in front of a DD. Just predict, where the dd or ship want to go and place it there, so it will have a bit cover to take the objective. Beside that, Wargaming anounced that one fighter kills one enemy planes. Most fighter consumables are more or less same, but the Enterprise has for example 6 fighters, and larger patrol area, while most CVs at T8 have only 3 fighter planes.
  7. I always have feel that premium ships give too little for its price and that playing with it is almost waste of time if you don’t have in plan to convert ship XP into Free XP with doubloons. So I suggest that Premium ships together with standard benefits also give 10% of general XP earned per battle into research tree which you mark as favorite example: Now I try to get Iowa BB so I mark for XP bonus USA Battleship tree AND bonus XP will get North Carolina because it is current in R&D list which need to get XP to unlock higher tier ship.
  8. Inhaltsverzeichnis (TEILWEISE INAKTUELL ab Patch 0.8.7.) Schaut euch die Punkte an, die euch interessieren und überspringt jene, die euch bereits bekannt sind. Autopilot und AA-Sektor Tastatur- und Mouse-Einsatz Wenden / Manövrieren Jägerstaffel-Einsatz Beschleunigen und Bremsen mit Sturzbombern AP Bomben bei verschiedenen Winkeln Zielen mit AP Bomben - Sturzbomber gegen leicht gepanzerte Ziele Zielen mit AP Bomben - Sturzbomber gegen schwer gepanzerte Ziele Allgemeine Hinweise, wie man AP Bomben verwendet Torpedobomber Flak und Geschwindigkeit Kommandanten-Fähigkeiten (Talentbaum) Glossar Flak-Explosionen: Effektunterschied zwischen Kriegsschiff und Flugzeugen (visuell) Raketen-Angriffsflugzeuge AP-Bomben Durchschlagskraft in mm 1. Autopilot und AA-Sektor 2. Tastatur- und Mouse-Einsatz 3. Wenden / Manövrieren 4. Beschleunigen und Bremsen mit Sturzbombern 5. Jägerstaffel-Einsatz 6. AP Bomben bei verschiedenen Winkeln 7. Zielen mit AP Bomben - Sturzbomber gegen leicht gepanzerte Ziele 8. Zielen mit AP Bomben - Sturzbomber gegen schwer gepanzerte Ziele 9. Allgemeine Hinweise, wie man AP Bomben verwendet 10. Torpedobomber 11. Flak und Geschwindigkeit 12. Flak-Explosionen: Effektunterschied zwischen Kriegsschiff und Flugzeugen (visuell) 13. Kommandanten-Fähigkeiten (Talentbaum) 14. Glossar 15. Raketen-Angriffsflugzeuge 16. AP-Bomben Durchschlagskraft in mm Englisches Video von Wargaming "How it works"
  9. Dear Wargaming, I would like to tell you many things, but I will try and keep it professional since I hope for an actual answer. One time, please. I understand you do not want to invest everything into the game maintenance because it is easier to add new content to monetize than to actually look into problems (see newest reddit post; Most of the top accounts of the island campaign were bots, and you banned not a single one.) While I do understand that it is more profitable in the short term for you as a company to generate fast revenue, do you really think that by ignoring problems you will keep your current playerbase? I am a CV player (or was. I adapted after 0.80 but since 0.85 I stopped). I still love this class though. This brings me to the CV rework. The following image sums up what I feel. : Most good CV RTS players flatout quit: Most people playing during RTS times either did not touch carriers, or were significantly worse than others. I myself was terrible for 2000 games, before I started to actually pay ANY attention to game mechanics. I practiced for half a year minimum and constantly got owned. I went to training rooms with hymnxblade, Adam_1000, fara...many really good players took time for me and showed me how to play properly. I never reached their level or could beat them, but I became quite ok. Most of the really good players are gone now. Adam stopped, hymnxblade quit and fara can sometimes be met on the chinese server. I lost many, many friends in this game. I still have contact to some, but others just quit and disappeared. So, in summary, of the really good players, 80 % flatout left the game. I understand the community is not aware of this, since they never cared about this "niche group" in the first place. I understand your motivation behind this. You wanted to cater to the bigger crowed, the average playerbase. I strongly disliked it, because just when I had become good, you invalidated my efforts and took everything away. But I understand the intentions from an economical perspective. You wanted to motivate the masses. Current state and perception of "good vs bad" players: State: It has been several months. The rework is still not even close to being finished, and I doubt you will ever finish it, personally. I hope you at least find a way to balance AA and CV gameplay though. It seems to me you have been becoming increasingly desperate. The last patch 0.85 quite frankly was an INSULT. I understand you want to "beta test" your stuff. That is why you have a test server (which, when people use it, is still largelz ignored, but that is another matter and has enough threads. You should check reddit more). But basically, you brought it out without even adapting AR or the plane heal. Basically, you rolled it out in a non-finished state. IF you put out an update, at least adapt the most common abilities. The "hotfix" of 10% HP was a numerical nonsense in itself, but well. E for effort. You put out an unfinished product with the attitude "yes, we didnt fix anything. We just changed the AA system, but you already own your carriers, so there is nothing you can do about it. Sit down and swallow (the pill, dear Wargaming. What else could I have possibly meant)." Currently, plane loss is unacceptable. Before that, in NONE of these patches did you find the sought after "ssweet spot" to balance CVs, in a positive or negative way. If a person continously fails to do something, would you trust him or her to be successful next time? Which is why I doubt this will ever happen. Perception: Apart from what people try to tell you, if you play solo, which most people do, it is significantly easier to "win" a game (influencing towards a positive match outcome for the team) with any other ship than with a CV. One of the main reasons is that "winning" does not depend on overall damage. On the contrary, the longer a game drags on, the more damage you can make. Winning is influenced by 2 things mainly, which you are well aware: 1. Taking out key targets (radar, dd, stretegically impostant ships) and 2. doing damage QUICKLY. If you kill 3 ships instantly, your overall firepower is remaining while focusing less enemies, resulting in a quicker game, a more likely win and less overall damage per player of the winning team. Regarding CV damage, which is where the different perceptions originate: Yes, I know it was possible to get 110 - 150k rounds if you were doing well on a regular basis. Still, I am a bad BB player. But I know BB players who averagely get 180k easily (those are tier X numbers). So, apart from public perception, on a high level CV play is just less influential than other ships. If you play in a division, it is different. But if you play solo: most people are potatoes, and it is averagely better to trust in yourself than to trust in your team. Spotting the DD is nice, but not if people fail to hit it. Now I understand that again, you care about the average player. Someone will bring this up anyway, and I am aware. The reason why "averagely" CVs still seem to do a lot of damage is that bad players can stay safe and still farm damage, whereas in a normal ship they would already have been farmed long ago. CVs are unique. The biggest noobs can stay safe and still get damage, which is impossible in any other ship. This is the explanation between the percieved "CV useless" attitude from good CV players (who experience their play severely nerfed to being actually useless) and the "but CV is still doing a lot of average dmg!" from non CV loving players. Community: edited (which btw, is my country). I am constantly reported just for playing CV. Many people have not accepted that is is part of the game. Many people dislike you, but as a CV you get open hate in nearly every game. Some people feel you need to do this, some people feel you need to do that. If you dont give a person who requests fighters support, crying and report. You fail to spot a DD, crying and report. Dozends of examples. I CAN PLAY THIS GAME HOWEVER I LIKE. That is a core preogative. If any other player in any other ships fails, people might realise it, but do not hate them in chat nearly as much. As CV, you stay alive longer than average. That means you already get more reports (becuase we all know, people report much more likely towards the end of a game when thez percive "someone lost their game" instead of reporthing the noob dd that ran into the radar at min 1 and was executed). But on top of that, I get reports for just playing my shipclass. It is RACISM IN WOWS. CV players are the minority, being hunted, hated and insulted. You do absolutely nothing to protect us. You realized you introduced a hard to balance element, but you DID introduce it. So man up and defend the people who enjoy it. Additionally, since there is no "percieved counterplay" against planes and people become frustrated faster, not even seeing what they did wrong to be bombed in the first place - again more hate. Most people still do not play CVs, they dont understand how it feels to lose all your planes in this new AA - again more hate. Most people have played DD, BB, CA CL. But many didnt touch CVs. They will thus even more likey report and flame "The CV", because he is not part of the "group of ships they play and understand (a little)." We are being systematically discriminated as a minority, and you are the state here. So it is your job to protect minorities from this. So FIX it. Every 1.5th game I play CV it starts with "OMG, CV game", followed by "CV spot this, CV spot that, OMG noob CV, report!". Instead of making videois about armor angles, maybe you should make a video about manners and defend the thing YOU created, which people like ME happen(ed) to enjoy. I personally have lost a lot of motivation to play this game. And only half of it is due to the fact that you first reworked my favourite shipclass and then nerfed it to a point where other ships are just more viable (stop freaking, I said more viable, I didnt say CVs are useless). The other 50% are due to the fact that I dont want to play a game in which I am insulted for being me and chosing my ship. When you play a shooter, nobody starts the game with "OMG, a medic" followed by reports, blackmail to report if you dont go here or there and general flame about your character choice. Games should be fun. Balancing is one thing (at thins point I have to congratulate you - "we will never implement submarines into the game". ). Being constantly discriminated for just chosing CV is another. Do not pretend the problem does not exist.
  10. AngryWallace

    How to fix the CV rework

    Hello everyone First things first: I do not dislike the rework in general. I have played RTS carriers since closed beta and I liked it ... maybe because I was quite good at it. But I can absolutely see why it is not accessable for all players. And there were other flaws: mainly that your fate as a non CV player in a game was destined by the skill of the CV-players. The rework addressed this at least to a certain point. I've seen very good CV players lose quite hard - even in ranked. I also like the more hands on approach with the removal of the top down view. But I still see a lot of problems with the rework. These are mainly rooted in the uniqueness of the CV class in regards to the other classes. 1. The huge spotting potential 2. The impossibility of evading a CV that wants to strike you consecutively 3. The lack of counterplay in general. I know when I made a mistake against surface ships. Against CVs ... not so much. Therefore I propose the following changes: - implement a system with gradually improving AA. The longer the ship is in spotting range of a plane, the Anti Air power goes up every second. There is even ample justification because AA gunners get more used to it, the longer they are actually shooting. The buff stays in that form for a small amount of time, say 45 seconds. That is to coerce the CV to pick a different target. The CV retains their ability to finish of wounded targets, since this normally requires not more than two strikes. It also alleviates the frustration of players who get attacked without pause. Against other classes of ships, there is the opportunity to get unspotted, drive outside their range or hide behind islands. This form of counterplay does not exist against CVs. The system is disabled, when the target is in surface-spotting range of the CV-vessel or if there is only one enemy ship left. - Spotting delay. Mostly DDs suffer a lot under the permanent spotting from planes. They often die from the spotting and the ensuing damage from non CV ships, rather than from plane attacks. Copy the spotting system from radar, where the radared ship only visible to other players after a short delay. This gives the DD player time to react. Again there is ample justification. It takes longer to relay information from plane to CV and then to other ships. - Give Defensive AA some of its worth back. its a joke right now. It doesn't have to be an almost 100% drop deterrence like before the update but at least make the drop reticule increase slightly. Give it something to make the CV at least think twice about striking. If been striked through DFA in my Worcester many times ... and not only the first attack. - Change AP bombs. AP bombs hurt - a lot - especially cruisers. I would propose you remove the ability to do citadel damage and give it strong full pens. That way there is some way to heal at least some of the painful damage. You feel really betrayed when your AA specced cruisers gets citadelled into oblivion through DFA without even the slightest chance of counterplay. Gamemechanic wise the existence of an I kill you button (I know I exaggerate here but still) has never been a good concept. - In general there should be more power in the torpedo bombers and less in dive bombers. Bombers cause a lot of frustration among players. I believe this has to do with a very human fear of things they can not see or can not assess. Torpedos can be seen when they are in the water and you can tell the exact moment when you get hit. therefore it is also possible to estimate the damage you will take beforehand. You can also move your ship in order to dodge them. You get an immediate reaction to wether you dodged well or not. This does not happen with bombers. You have no idea wether when exactly the damage will hit you and you get no really confirmation wether the damage or the lack thereof has to do with your dodging skills or with bad RNG. - The fighter consumable is a somewhat bizzare concept. it lacks any justification. Do they just materialize magically? I have thought about a more fitting concept, that also fits game mechanic wise. I am unsure about this. it could be the ability of directing a fighter squad from your CV to guard a certain ship. But they need time to get to the allied ship. This would require some planning. - Some may say the easiest way to fight carriers is in a blob. The problem I see here: It seriously hampers possibility of attempts to get map control and clever positioning. It instead encourages lemming trains. I know that historically ships would fight in convois to give each other air support. But historically ships wouldnt fight in very confined spaces like archipels. And they had very good communication, years of training and a structure of command. None of this, especially not open waters (expect ocean map of course) exists in WoWs. Last words. I have seen some unbelievable toxicity in chat towards CV players. This has to stop. On the other hand, I found myself in the situation where I was so frustrated that I was ready to type really mean words towards CVs. Please make some changes to make the game enjoyable again. They don't have to be my changes. But at least do something. Regards AngryWallace (the name is misleading, I am not angry but frustrated)
  11. Proposal – Improved Unique Commanders Bonuses/Talents setup WOWS has two types of Commanders: Legendary and Unique Commanders. Unique Commanders have a bonus/talent that applies in all types of matches (random battles, co-op, clan, operations etc.). Legendary Commanders have a bonus/talent that does not apply in clan battle matches but does apply in all other types of matches. Legendary Commanders: Isoroku Yamamoto, Nikolay Kuznetsov, William Halsey Unique Commanders: Quan Rong, Da Rong, Franz von Jütland, Reinhart von Jütland, Vasily Znamensky, Viktor Znamensky, Charles-Henri Honore, Jean-Jacques Honore, Bert Dunkirk, Jack Dunkirk, George Doe, John Doe and four variants of Alexander Ovechkin This proposal concerns the Unique Commanders, NOT the Legendary Commanders. A major disadvantage of the current setup of the Unique Commanders is that they have a fixed set of bonuses/talents. That leaves the player no choice. All Unique Commanders have bonuses/talents that makes them only suitable for one class of ship. That is highly regrettable considering that Unique Commanders can only be acquired by either investing a lot of time or real world money (golden doubloons). The current Unique Commanders have bonuses/talents that makes them mostly suitable for assignment to Battleships and/or Cruisers. A minority of the Unique Commanders is – arguably - suited for assignment on Destroyers. Some countries have Unique Commanders with bonuses/talents that really only makes them suitable for assignment on one class of ship and none of the other classes. Currently the typical bonuses/talents for Unique Commanders give a +14% to +50% advantage for 2x Commander Skills (3x skills for the two British Unique Commanders). Most of the Unique Commanders have a +50% bonus/talent for varying Commander Skills. This proposal tries to address the absence of a choice in bonuses/talents choice for Unique Commanders: - All Unique Commanders will get a +X% bonus on the FIRST THREE skills that the PLAYER chooses to invest Skill Points in. - The +X% that is proposed is +50% or could alternatively be +40%. - When introducing the above there would be a free Unique Commander Skill reset, the reset would be for Unique Commanders only. - Needless to say: the current three Legendary Commanders and the standard Commanders would not be affected by this change. For all existing Unique Commanders this would be an improvement, meaning that those bought with Golden Doubloons would not be weakened by introducing the changes proposed above. Additional information on the Unique and Legendary Commanders can be found here: https://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Ship:Unique_Commanders What do you, the players, think about this proposal? Are you happy with having NO CHOICE in the current Unique Commander bonuses/talents? Would you like to instead have A CHOICE by selecting the bonuses/talents for your Unique Commanders yourself?
  12. ZuraJanaiCaptanKatsuraDa

    Hakuryu

    What I'm going to say is very simple to understand. I'm a casual wows player. Since one week, I started to play CVs taking advantage of the free premium days I had. After less than one hundred games with the shokaku, I got enough xp to unlock the hakuryu. I didn't have enough credit so I sold all my other ships to buy the hakuryu with all the upgrades. And here comes my problem. With the shokaku, I managed to get an average of 100k damage per game. But with the hakuryu, not only I can't even get up to half the damage I made with the shokaku, but I also loose 100k credit per game. With the hakuryu, it is impossible to drop torpedos, because ennemy ships see you coming and the distance of activation for torpedoes is so big that the targeted ship will have the time to dodge even if the aiming is perfect. As it is not possible to drop torps near the target, it is thus impossible to hit the target with torps. Why is the activation distance so insane for the hakuryu's torps ? After loosing millions of credit by playing the hakuryu (-100k credit per game) I gave up and sold the hakuryu to buy a nagato and a ryujo. But what's the point of continuing to play this game ? I mean, my initial goal was to get the hakuryu to have fun. My logic was simple : Hosho = nice cv Ryujo = good cv Shokaku = Very good cv So, with this pattern, I was expecting the hakuryu to be a very very good cv and a fun ship to play with, but no, unfortunatly, it's just a useless floating aircraft container, with the maintenance costing 300k per game, even loss of credit is impossible to avoid, even with premium. I then did some research on the internet and I found out that according to some people the hakuryu was "over powered" and that all the things I listed above are just the result of a nerf applied to this ship. The question I have is why not to simply delete the hakuryu as it is so nerfed that it's just a useless ship ? Fun = 0, gameplay = 0, credits earned = 0, usefulness for team mates = 0, So what's the point of adding a huge and costly ship to the game if it is inefficient and depressing to play. When I was playing the Shokaku, I was so happy, it was awsome to play, fun was there, at every game, I had fun, the games I lost and won. I had fun all the time no matter if it was loss or win. I thought that the hakuryu was going to be an even better experience, but I was mistaken. Now, after 20 games with the hakuryu, and millions of credits lost, I am depressed. I was so exited about this CV and it was even the first tier X ship I was going to try, and all of my excpectations got crushed by these 20 games. They 20 games of death almost brought me to death. But I said no, I won't give up, and in a last effort filled with the hope to see a decent Hakuryu, I decided to write this opened letter to all of mankind. People of the earth, please, listen to this epic call, we must convince Wargaming to give the hakuryu the glory it deserves to have. I know there is pressure on Wargaming, and I know that a lot of people hate CVs, when I heard what some people say in chat, I was shocked. There is a lot of anti CV racism in the game and that's a problem. The anti CV racists put pressure on WG to nerf all the CVs, specialy the hakuryu. I know that there is pressure, but to fall for that pressure a bad idea. CV like any other ships have their place in the game. I'm not asking for laser guided missiles mounted on aircrafts, nor am I asking for adding any over powered features that would break the game balance. I... Wa... Watashi... I am just saying that ultra low speed combined with 9000km activation distance for torps is wrong, This kind of things is breaking the game balance. And one last thing, I'm tired of anti CV racism, people hate us CV players, I don't even know why,and because of that hatred, I was about to commit suic... I can't tell you more, all this hatred toward CVs is just a horrible thing. People often simplify the CV players role, claiming that it's an easy task and so on, they forget that behind every hosho, every lexington, every shokaku, every audacious, there is in fact someone who is audacious and willing to help his team the best way possible. But with the hakuryu, it's not possible to be audacious, I was so sad and depressed playing this ship, + the insults coming from anti CV haters,I finally came to the point where I ended up torping myself several times. It was to much painful to play. How can people see with their own eyes CV players all around the world torping themselves and not yet realising that it's a desperate call for help ? People close their eyes on these issues because they still believe in the "CVs are overpowered" fairy tales. When you repeat a lie thousands of times, you come to a point where even the lier himslef starts believing his own lies. Same thing is going on here, there is in this game, a culture of hatred aimed at CVs. People dislike CVs and then put pressure on Wargaming staff in order to nerf them to death. That's the sad reality, and in a last breath of hope, I'm writing the last words of this letter. Thank you for reading, Arigato , alekoum salam, gracias, hasta la vista, danke Captain Katsura
  13. Hello ! First of all, i would like to say that I understand why would WG want to rework the CV section. So, i will introduce my self first. You my notice that i is one of my first topic launch. Because as a player, i dedicate more of my time playing than going on forums. (not that it is useless, but because i like play. But i like to check it sometimes for guides etc.) You also might ask why would i introduce myself a bit, and that would be not useful ? It is to show what profile is talking about that big warzone topic that is CV. I am a player that came when playing wot around 2015. I heard about WoWs during this period (not exact). and WoWs was the only game that make me interested about ships in WW2, because before that, i was more in star wars stuff but never mind. I play WoWs when most of the ships where IJN and USN. So as a newbie a "make" a dream list of boat. Bceuase a a newcomer of WG game we dont know how much exp it will requiert to reach TX and even get skills to even carry or can play at lower tier. So chose somes. ad begin the play. PLUS as i am not a big ultra fan at the beginning, i play and farm mostly "for fun and learn purposes" first. But as a casual player i also switch games to games. I play WoWs more like seasonly or intensly but not continously. As some player already said in other post while searching for guides was that: the first 500 game whill show you how hard it is to learn. The 1000 game will give u a little bit of XP and show you how deep the strat can be. I am now at my 1000 game. I know few thing but not a lot as a dedicated WoWs player. So i had a lot of feelings in the game because i might not be well describe their but i might not play the game has a loyal man. But when i play a game, and this game. I like to learn, lose, win and understand the mechanics. Remember the FEELINGS. When it comes to feelings, you chose your ships and then became the first impressions. BB are slow tanky and not that manoeuvrable. CA/CL are kind of a medium ship DD are fast manoeuvrable and sneaky ships. AND THEN CV: when i first tried out (in RTS version) i was a bit lost because of the RTS view. Not because it was a strange design. But because i wasnt able to see the more straigt. The view was to much zoomed and was in a feeling of dive. Much like watching the ground. (FIRST SUGGESTION IN RTS MODE that disapear was and would be: having a scaling RTS view between the actual view and the map one.) I feel CV a different and interesting gameplay. EVEN if i lost most of my first CV game. I felt like if i was a bit better, i would shredd ships. So i learnt about manual drop and straffs (SECOND SUGGESTION IN RTS MODE taht disapear was and would be: why does manual straffs and drop removed for T4/T5 ?) Beside overall interfaces view of CV game play. I would like to compare both the RTS version of the CV gameplay and the 0.8.0 now 0.8.3 gameplay. But after that you might also say that feelings or not important compared to the balance. Maybe but WG isnt trash as a dev team. (maybe only edit team might be the one) So game designer can pretty sur mix both things. Game play design and feelings shared by it. Back to the comparison: RTS first feelings: The CV seems to be a strategic boat which need to be greatly placed to get to the point where both defending team mates and attacking is efficient. because of the multi suqad control thing. 0.8.0 firstr feelings: The CV seems to be a hangar for squad aircraft spawn to play a shoot game I know i might exaggerate. But it is that. The RTS view show and make the CV playuer more immersed as a CV captain. Feelings like how CV works in real life during WW2. (I know they dont do exactly same ! but will be more fidele to it) The best image for CV feels during RTS mode was that the captain/player was like a captain faced to a map whith icon that represent the suad that he control, more like an essential role. Where now the 0.8 make it feel an other way. For sur it keep his same role but loses that feeling. But more of a hangar where u are a pilot squad captain that just takeoff a ship. SO ! i am almost in the RTS team for sur, BUT i also understand what make the new system more appealing for some reasons and for some player bases. Thats why it is the same with each boat. DD feels weak but manoeuvrable, and can make some supprise attack CA/CL feels like a support ground force. That have the role of giving opportunity for mate to could do their role (their might be exeption but corect me if so) As HE on BB to avoid them aving great angle on mates. Radaring DD to avoid traps. Hydroing avoinding and preventing Torps for BB. Etc... BB feels tanky and powerful in exchange of their manoeuvrability. and CV are same, they have the role of controling the air space, provinding air supp and air attack to give opportunity to other to accomplish their own role. For me it is almost like a RPG/MOBA game where each ship have their own spec and gameplay role. it is the same thing and must be fiedel as much as possible in synergy with the game design. (I almost talk about the feels more that the game adjstement. but wait a bit...) For the good sake of CV from RTS to 0.8. Why not just merge both design to be accurate ? Why not keeping the RTS par because of the feelings ? Because most of the time from what i saw, 0.8 is better because alpha stike is less painfull. But more for DD. It cant deplane harder an oppennent. It is more joyful for newcomer. (not me sadly, but why not make them enoying the ancien ver ? (thats mostly because of the inefficency of T4/T5)) And about the feeling of being closer to the fight that on RTS view. It is false acording to the CV feels design. It isnt meant to be Close combat feeling. (ofc according to the feels again) So why not mix feels of CV and adjustment to make it pleasant for all ? Now maybe my aumentation and essay was woobly, but for sur, all player who are passionnate about ships whill understand what are those feelings. It is not about simplifying gameplay. It is about TWEAKING to get the perfect mesure for low tier and top tier as the Mighty shredder midway. SO What are what i suggest ? remember that this is suggestion. First i will use the battle of midway as an example. When Lexington and other USN CV iirc where attempting to attack yamamoto's main fleet. It was at first a recon war where they both "reconing" to could be the first to give the strike. And then being the big waves of planes. from wikipedia, not sur exactly. USS lexington had a space for aircraft of 22 fighters, 36 bombers and 12 torps bombers. I know that the desing of making only one big armada of planes going threw the map isnt great... or IS IT ? So why not for the new hypothetical rerework have a limited hangar of planes ? As accurate as possible but with possibility to tweak and changes the ammount of each kind of Aircrafts for diversity and design purpose. Because of the enoughly big amount of planes, like multi squad control as the RTS mode. The view will be mainly RTS but wil more scale view to get the perfect angling. Iwould add like a new type of planes while erasing the inacurate missile attack planes (tell me if i am wrong). Their will be 4 type : Recon planes Fighters Bombers Torp Bombers CAUTION. i know that CV were not meant to recon on both game build. But why not as in midway battle ? We have to tweak Fighters Bombers Torp Bombers to have a shorter range of view. And a rannge of view for recon planes to be limited at 6km (even fewer than the current stage) OFC, they wont be a lot. Only one can be flying around per CV, and only on other one is in the hangar. With as the RTS have given to fighters=AMMO. Here for recoin will be fuel or time limited flying path. like 3 min for 2 min CD. Enough fragile to get shredded when on risky moves because of the 6km. And more over to be less paintless ofr DD ! = they wont ping the type of boat at a certain rage like 6 km for a point ping in minimap only, and a ship type ping on minimap only when at 4-3 km. (depending on the type of boat. Which gives a deeper mecanics for concealment in relation with planes). More over ! Even if info is shared for all team. It will be retarded and delay of around 10 or 15 sec depending on CV to consider the "logistic" of how does recon transmit the message to the CV and when the CV will give info (as a radio wave) AGAIN more over, only recon will send infos to CV for Point ping and ship type ping on minimap ONLY. (CV will share that for all mates. BUT Fighters Bombers Torp Bombers wont recon for others, only info for CV) From the begining of a game their would be like maybe a timer for all planes. before take of. But only recon one is working on CD. Other wil be like generating planes in CD from hangar to completly make a squad. maybe like 60 sec before recon take off. And 90 sec before Squand ready with only one plane and others ore preparing for CV dock and squad ? Like that CV early snipe and early recon woudnt be effective. Wouldint that be interresting. (Remeber that this is suggestion about my argumentation of how would rework be interesting and how could it be to please every body) So we please DD and all for "reconning" thing no ? The system of attack would for me be same as RTS for Fighters Bombers Torp Bombers BUT with already fully aimed system. with only AA degrading the aim. Maybe as for BB normalisation variable, penetration variable etc. Planes as Fighters Bombers Torp Bombers can have their own variable as morale or "determination" Where the more AA they took, the more they began inacurate and have less window time to launch attack. OFC it will be tweaked for each nation. (ex: IJN will withstand more AA damage to degrade the accuration of the drop fewer, but increase the chance of taking AA damage. That will give as more "secret deth" as penetration variable, healing party, fires, flooding. etc. Overall, from stats the planes would have a greater chance to hit targer or at least drop payload. even with the AA debuff aiming. But will take more damage. So less plane form same squad can drop. It will drop but not as a full squad. For AA work now. It woulbe be interesting to keep this new AA system. But also with his own accuracy variable. lIke the more time planes are in the AA range, the more damage it will took from it. of course the variable will depend on remaing aa on boat and in how many AA zone they are in (from how many ships zones) And maybe put more over the sector renforcement system, a target priority thing as before which act like 5 or 10% faster atteining a Max AA damage from the variable. Like it will take more and faster damage from stying in zone. which by this way will decrease the variable of other ssquand in the same zone. Doesnt adding new variable for CV planes AA system better that rework all the system and loosing all the feels ? I know that it might need tweak in my suggestion buyt also as the actual rework to see how it could shine. But being able to kept the accurate feelings for the same role is IMO better that changing the feels for only the good sake of balance. MOREOVER and maybe out of topic. But why not having radars and hydro modules being destroyable on CA/CL ? or as engine, they can at least being disable ? Liek that i will again increase interaction betaween team mate where DD would need others to disable radars that can or cannot get repared by repair system. It will IRCC decrease the DD oppression if it still have one. Like that DD attacks will be more confortable because of the ability to disable radar or even hydro. (hydro will be a compartment inside the citadel or casemate as engine, ammo rack stuffs...) And also be less oppresive because of AA variable which make them take more damage and see less further. unless it is recon that only ping on minimal and with a delay. Finaly, main question would be like does each sugestion will be interesting enough for Wg to take a look at that ? or it is a hopeless topic that wont be even read by anyone and that WG will ignore ? THANKS A LOT FOR READING this BIG BLOC. I cant thank you a lot. Any critizise is welcome because this was a big though for me. I love the game because of the game but also of how WG devs mainly succes a making you feel each boat to ! AS i repeat my self, all that suggestion might took off my credibility, or contradict each argument each other. I am not sur about that. But be sur to correct me !. PS sry for a not gramaticaly accurate english, i am not a native english writer :/
  14. Randathamane

    So, The carrier rework then...

    Here is a simple poll for the community regarding the aircraft carrier rework. Simple question, is it better now or has it been broken?
  15. Admiral_Qwert

    Are IFHE Rockets a good idea?

    Hey guys, just some food for thought. Since rockets have pen, can't we have the IFHE skill work on it too to increase pen? Just an idea since rockets work really similarly to HE shells already. Feel free to discuss. Just throwing the idea out there.
  16. DeviousDave02

    AA rework suggestion.

    FORWARD: This idea is entirely a case of IMO - I realize it's probably not to everyone's liking or taste and will in all likely hood be ripped to shreds and have over a dozen flaws pointed out but 'hey, nothing ventured, nothing gained' So please, no - 'OP CV PWEASE NURF/BURN IN A NUCLEAR FIRE' or 'DD CWY BABY, GIT GOOD' comments... ...There's literally a dozen+ (and growing) other threads for that. THE SITUATION: So after watching dozens of You tube videos on the CV rework game play, playing CV's and lurking on here and the STEAM forum I came to the conclusion that the AA rework, kinda doesn't really work to well. The issue (IMO) is that it's entirely damaged based which leads to awkward game play issues in that some ships have AA that just shreds aircraft while other ships AA would have trouble fighting off a weather balloon. This leads to an all or nothing approach to AA, either your AA is strong enough to make CV's cry and run away or.. well.. yeah.. the words 'sitting duck' springs to mind. There is no/little in between here as hurting a CV's squadron doesn't really help (or at least feels like it doesn't) as some of the damage still get's through unimpeded AND the CV has more/regenerating planes to throw at you while you (the surface ship) have finite HP that doesn't come back. You end up being chipped to death with (what feels like) no counter play other than turning. Of course CV's argue differently as sitting staring at your deck waiting 2 minutes for your lazy hanger crew to ready one ****ing TB plane is pretty vexing (been there) This leads to the current situation where surface ships want AA to shred, while CV's would rather it just scratched the paintwork slightly and this leads to the 'blobbing' game play everyone knows and hates as everyone groups up around the highest power AA ships and pray to RNGesus that it will protect them. And then we have the sector reinforcing mechanic, which boosts AA on one side of the ship at the expense of the other side. This highlights the 'damage focus' issue AA has as ships with high AA power don't really need to use this in anything other than extreme circumstances (or if they want that bomber squadron over there to reeeallllyyyy go away) while low power AA ships will not be saved by it as their AA is so weak it really doesn't make much difference (feel free to correct me if I'm wrong but at tier 4/5 - reinforcing feels like it does sweet **** all if I'm in a poor AA ship) THE IDEA Move the value of AA away from just pure damage and blowing planes from the sky, obviously AA focused ships would still be better at AA duty but weaker AA ships should still be able to effectively defend themselves from air attack. My thoughts on this are to place more emphasis on the correct and skillful use of the reinforcing mechanic to deter air attacks. This could be achieved by toning down AA damage on high power AA ships while boosting AA damage on the really low performing AA ships (with a net loss to AA power), removing the 150% (I think, correct me if wrong) AA damage boost from reinforcing and then introducing 'perks' or stat changes to the AA system that activate on the side of the ship that has been reinforced. Note: for this idea to work, ALL ships should be given short range AA, including ship that currently have NO AA (just pretend the crew have ran out on deck with rifles to shoot at the passing planes) PERK IDEAS Perks would be based around the idea of disrupting an air attack or making accurate striking harder for the CV player if they attack from the reinforced side. values given are just rough ideas and subject to change based on feedback. HEAVY AA: Increase RoF by 10% Increase Flak generation by 50% of maximum Flak Decrease accuracy by 25% Barrage - adds an AoE effect to the long range AA zone that deals very low constant damage to aircraft in it - adds graphical effect of mini AA explosions and smoke bursts all over the sky while in this zone - possibly add fake flak clouds above and below the players position. The idea is that this creates a visual 'wall of doom' that makes flying in that direction unappealing to the CV player by increasing the amount of flak as well as spreading it out more. Overall your more likely to clip a plane formation doing some damage but less likely to score a massive blow by having the formation play through multiple Flak clouds at once. note: The increased Flak is based off of the Flak generated after modifiers are applied - so if your ship normally generates 8 Flak clouds per attack you would generate 12 Flak clouds on the reinforced side however with captain skills/ship modifications you could in theory up the Flak generated to 10 Flak clouds per attack in which case you would generate 15 Flak clouds clouds on the reinforced side. MEDIUM AA: Increased RoF by 10% Accuracy decreased by 10% Zero in - for every (x) seconds spent under fire from the reinforced medium AA guns the accuracy/hit chance of these guns increases by 5% topping off at a 50% higher than standard hit chance. This effect will linger on the planes as a de-buff meaning even after you leave the reinforced side it will still apply for a few seconds before negating back to 0% (so if the surface ship swaps reinforced sectors fast enough/turns to put the aircraft back in the sector the medium AA guns will be firing from the value they were at when the planes first left instead of starting from 0% boost again) Crippling blow - Very, Very low chance per hit of causing the struck plane to immediately break off from the attack/squadron and start to climb to safety before returning to base - aircraft that are forced to break off have a massive damage reduction applied making it far harder for them to be shot down. The idea here is that medium AA guns create a zone that is very dangerous for aircraft to lurk in as the longer they stay, the more likely they are to get hit and either get shot down or possibly forced to fly back home. This puts a soft limit on how long a CV's squadron can spend lurking around a ship before it gets into real trouble. LIGHT AA: Range increased by 1-2 kilometers Panic - (same as the old panic effect) short range AA guns cause a panic effect on aircraft within their area of effect. This panic effect causes the targeting reticule to slowly start to expand, becoming less accurate (similar to if the plane was maneuvering during an attack) and reducing accuracy gain. The reticuel will max out at 40 - 50% accuracy (If your below that it will slowly degrade back to this value, if above then it won't decrease any further than this) with maneuvering causing the effect to increase. Hold the line - Increases Panic effect by 300% and removes the 50% limit allowing accuracy to drop back to 0% against remaining aircraft in a squadron that have just dropped munitions. The idea here is that short range AA is your ships last line of defense that focuses on reducing the accuracy of an attack against you and gives the best chance for avoiding damage by quick rudder control. (also helps to reduce cheesy drop tactics) CONCLUSION The overall idea here is to give surface ships the ability to handle air attacks without needing to blow every last plane from the sky, and to allow WG to balance AA without sea-sawing between OP AA and can't shoot down a kite AA by introducing useful perks to reinforced AA that could be further improved with ship modules and Captain perks (I imagine the community could come up with some fun ones) And hell, you might even consider actually giving the lower tier CV's some teeth so they can hurt things in a reasonable amount of time.
  17. FixCVs_Nautical_Metaphor

    CVs and gaming enjoyment in WoWs: 2nd Survey

    Wargaming have kept trying to balance the reworked aicraft carriers, fix bugs and exploits etc. You have had a week to test the latest round of changes, so the time has come for the next carrier-related gaming enjoyment survey.
  18. Hey WG and the Community One potential balance fix for the current CV meta could be: Limit number of carriers per game to maximum 1 per team. They are a nice touch in the game. By limiting them to max 1 per game the overall experience would rise. It would mean more games will include a carrier and when they do it will be better balanced for both teams. Introduce a minimum time cool-down between carrier strikes from active squadron. Around up to 25 seconds. This would serve as an equivalent to reload of guns on battleships and help the overall feeling when you attack or are under attack form a carrier. Preferably this cool-down would start low at maybe 15 seconds and rise with the tiers to about 25 seconds at tier 10. This would allow different strategies for both attacking and defending parties; both on evading damage and using consumables with a little breather to maneuver. This could also come with a new consumable for higher tier carriers to allow them to shorten this cool-down momentarily - think french reload booster. These are just some thoughts me and my clan mates had and I expect and hope to see the communities thoughts around such changes, possible flaws and improvements and of course other ideas. Thank you
  19. Mangrey

    Rework of CVs

    Is there any thing new in the REwork front ? vid, dates ,progress of any sorts ? mang
  20. Picturion

    About the HMS furious

    The other day the game brought up a survey about the new CVs, but I had only played the hermes, so I had no idea what feedback to give, considering that all T4 CV play is awful (but that is to be expected) So now that I am informed I can give some specific opinions that I should have given in that survey. The good Health and surface detectability are fine. Plane HP is good enough and AA firepower is as good as it is necessary in its tier. Torps are slow but powerful and rockets are not very hard hitting but accurate. The Bad Those cluster bombs. I cannot even describe how frustrating and unreliable they are. They scatter all over the place, hitting everywhere but the target area (I swear that sometimes they land outside of it). I would say that to be different from the other nations they should be accurate, but not very powerful. Even the gigantic dispersion circle of the ranger's divebombers gets better results. Everytime from the ranger or ryujo to the furious I feel I'm getting a hand tied to my back, like every type of squadron I have matters and has a purpose. Air surface detectability; not fatal, but even the ranger has better concealment from air Again, this is the opinion of someone who never plays beyond T7 (I just don't like the higher tier gameplay and the endless overtiering in T8), so I don't know how all of what I've said applies to further ships down the line.
  21. Torpedoschaden von 5,5k auf 4,544k. Der Schaden wurde erst kürzlich von 6k auf 5,5k gesenkt. "Graf Zeppelin and Soviet battleships changes. The total damage output of Graf Zeppelin is still very high. To keep the special features of GZ's attack planes and dive bombers and balance the total amount of damage this CV can inflict, the damage of torpedoes is lowered from 5500 to 4533. This change will be live at 14:00 UTC on 13.03.19. It's not planned to make further changes to the parameters of Graf Zeppelin, Saipan, Kaga and Enterprise. We consider their balancing finished. We also would like to remind you that you can exchange your CVs in the Inventory section before the time to do this expires with 0.8.2." https://www.facebook.com/wowsdevblog
  22. wilkatis_LV

    Tap that

    I'm sure at least some of you already knew this since apparently it has been a "thing" since the TST1, but lack of general mentions leads me to think that this tapping is far from general public knowledge... What am I talking about? W Why hold it and run out of boost quickly, if you can just tap it to keep your speed up? Sure, you'll lose couple knots on average... for multiple times the duration of your boost. What you do is: Hold W to boost up to max speed or at least close to it Instead of holding the W you start tapping it (practice makes perfect) Speed doesn't manage to fall, meanwhile duration gets "chunked" only by the fraction of a second you had your W pressed each tap Here's some recording of my very 1st attempt at this when I heard this might be a thing (recorded to compare the duration). Despite it being my very 1st attempt I managed to hold it around 2...3kts lost for x2.33 ... x2.67 the duration on the boost. Since then with a slight bit of practice I've increased that to about x3 ... x3.5 the duration And this is with a very short boost. As a comparison Langleys TBs and DBs - both of whom have a 24s boost (with the build I have, I think it's 20s base duration) - I can take off and then fly to my target in a permanent boost that lasts over a minute Don't know about you, but in my book this is a serious exploit
  23. Zenturio52

    Balance für CVs

    Ich hab bis jetzt nur die 10er CVs und Saipan getestet aber es braucht balancing Ansonsten bin ich 8-10er DD, CA/CL und BB gefahren Midway: Die TBs sind etwas schwer zu spielen. ein Flugzeug raus aus der Angriffswelle und den spread nicht so aufreißen lassen bei kleinen Manövern Ansonsten OK Haku: Die flood Wahrscheinlichkeit der TBs ist zu hoch. Jeder 2te oder 3te Torpedo verursacht ein flooding. Der spread könnte bei Manövern etwas weiter aufgehen AA: Meiner Meinung nach in Ordnung so bis auf einen kleinen Aspekt. (Braucht auch weiterhin balancing) Der Rückzug der Flugzeuge sollte etwas verzögert werden damit eine rein raus Strategie etwas gefährlicher wird DD: Leiden etwas unter den Raketen aber im Gegensatz zu Midway 2/2/2 ist das völlig in Ordnung. CA/CL: Besonders bei AA Skillung sind die wenigen Flugzeugabschüsse eine Enttäuschung. Aber der Schaden ist eigentlich in Ordnung wird im Endscreen nur nicht angezeigt. BB: Alles in Ordnung Tipp: Fährt man alleine oder auch zu zweit stellt die AA keine große Bedrohung für den CV da, ein Blob aus 4 Schiffen hingegen schon.
  24. Greyshark

    Lotniskowce Royal Navy

    Niedawno została pokazana nowa linia lotniskowców, jak można się było spodziewać, brytyjskich. Oto one: Są to: HMS Courageous HMS Audacious HMS Implacable HMS Indomitable HMS Hermes Od razu rzuca się w oczy brak HMS Ark Royal, więc pewnie premka. Jak myślicie, na którym będzie tierze? Jakich samolotów można się na nich spodziewać? Ogólnie bardzo mnie cieszy wprowadzenie tej gałązki, od dawna na nią czekałem.
  25. I'm going to keep this very short, since Mr. Conway has already stated this: "If our players deem this necessary, we can always re-implement this feature" in the very first CV Rework Livestream. We NEED (!!!!!!!!!!!!) manual ship control!!!! Period. _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________ "Constructive" feedback, for the people who absolutely don't understand my (our/us, CV players') frustration: Fellow CV players will understand what I mean. Properly positioning your carrier, and estimating distances and whatnot is near-impossible on minimap (auto)pilot, and I got myself killed countless of times since 0.8.0.0 went Live because of my bow sticking out behind the island or whatever spots me due to the unavailability of manual steering, manual control, manual what-the-[edited]-you-want-to-call-it. Personally I don't understand ANY SINGLE THING of WG's reason to remove this essential key feature from aircraft carrier gameplay. The only way of manual steering is to recall your squadrons with F, then basically do nothing to help your team to spot or deal damage, no, you're simply positioning your damn ship, which got me reported multiple times with my teammates stating "Go play Ship Simulator", or "Bot CV"........ Seemingly WG developers haven't played CVs since they would know how essential such a small feature is. I like the CV rework, but I am unable to properly play without this feature. I've been spending thousands of Euro's on World of Warships since June 2015, when I started playing, and I was planning on getting Kaga and Graf Zeppelin day one after they'll be on sale again, but maybe you'll wake up after you'll flush about 200,- Euro's through the sink: I will not spend anything related to aircraft carriers without proper ship control! Angry regards, Sirion PS. I know that I'm not the only one with this problem, yet I haven't seen one single player that properly addresses this issue and why this shouldn't have been removed from the game. People say WG "dumbs down" CV gameplay while the CV players themselves could CHOOSE to USE or NOT USE this system; if they think it's too hard to manage, then they DON'T HAVE TO use it!
×