CV Rework Discussion

[AirSupremacy]

Perhaps the thread should be renamed to

"The big rant box of the game" :D

 

 

 

 

[Culiacan_Mexico]

3 hours ago, 1MajorKoenig said:

 

Well... ok. And I am almost sure you will get your submarines one day (after the Halloween event) - but beware the whining on the forums the weeks after this happens 

A traditional type of submarine doesn't really seem viable in this game, or at least not in randoms. Scenarios are a possibility though.

[Culiacan_Mexico]

2 hours ago, AirSupremacy said:

BB`s could also play a role and fit into this game,

especially as they sometimes get disturbed in matches by DD`s.

?

[Hurricane_tb]

So I just took a 13,6 k from Midway BOMBERS in my Gearing. 10 sec later, another 7,3 k and then the final blow. And yes, def AA was active. Felt good. I felt engaged in the whole time and being rewarded for trying to cap aka playing the objective.

 

How can a CV even get a 13,6 k drop on a DD? Even if it is as thick as a Gearing, this is ridicolous... (not just this, but this in particular)

[anonym_WQDIB9XrzbSp]

4 hours ago, WynnZeroOne said:

No, the list of warships sunk by u-boats alone is pretty sizeable. That's just USN ships, I've not even considered RN yet.

 

Not trying to have a row here mind you, aerial torps and bombs were the no1 cause of sinkings, per the importance of CV in naval gameplay, but there are a lot of submarine kills, even just reviewing u-boat sinkings.

 

3 hours ago, Sunleader said:

This is actually wrong.

Or well.

More accurately. It is misleading.

 

Because most Ships being Sunk by Aircraft is actually True.

Roundabout 70-80% of that however was land based Aircraft.

By the way, in your desperate effort to find all my forum posts and the scour the internet for random facts to try to prove me wrong, you've fallen flat on your face. You see, in your hurry to argue with anything I've posted, you've assumed I stated CV based aircraft, I didn't. My reply (to someone else I might add) was related to there being lots of submarine kills even though the majority of ships fell to aerial weaponry. However, you have in your desperate search for stats proved my point around the importance of aircraft in naval warfare as 20--30% it would seem were from sea-based aircraft. It took 259 aircraft in 9 waves from four separate CV's as I recall to sink Musashi and a similar gargantuan effort to sink Yamato. Thank goodness for those CV's that turned the war as the most important vessels of the time. Thank for your stats.

 

3 hours ago, Sunleader said:

Oh look.

Another Post dedicated to my person instead of saying anything on the Topic.

 

Why am I not Surprised :)

Again, trying to insinuate a personal attack that has not occurred to smokescreen your inability to have rational discussion. That's basically your entire contribution. You rudely and pompously dismiss someone elses contribution to a discussion as irrelevant and biased, then when challenged regarding your condescension and arrogance you presume to start crying rape? Laughable. You've still not actually demonstrated a ability to discuss or exercise reason, rather you've continued to assume, with spectacular delusion that I've verbally attacked you? Honestly, my three year old makes better arguments.

 

Honestly now, give it a rest. You don't like carriers, we get it. Stop steamrolling and trolling everyone with their own suggestions and observations to which they are entitled. I have been more than civil, you have been rude and discourteous. I appreciate our backgrounds are likely worlds apart, but my goodness your lack of manners and belligerent communication style are annoying as f*** and lend nothing to the forum overall. Feedback, from all sides is useful, but incessantly disparaging the feedback and opinions of others is pathetic, lacks maturity and gets you laughed at.

[anonym_WQDIB9XrzbSp]

1 hour ago, AirSupremacy said:

Perhaps the thread should be renamed to

"The big rant box of the game" :D

 

 

 

 

Problem is, even actual rants would be feedback. Most of this is a toxic shouting down of anyone sharing their opinion or daring to make suggestions. There are a small crowd who must genuinely believe that there can be a rollback and to this end have no interest in feedback or balance, just undermining any sort of progress or efforts to discuss improvement.

 

[Yosha_AtaIante]

Vor 1 Stunde, WynnZeroOne sagte:

Problem is, even actual rants would be feedback. Most of this is a toxic shouting down of anyone sharing their opinion or daring to make suggestions. There are a small crowd who must genuinely believe that there can be a rollback and to this end have no interest in feedback or balance, just undermining any sort of progress or efforts to discuss improvement.

 

That's what i like about these people. And it's not like the entire forum is in here discussing with us. It's usually the same, around 10 people who are repeating the same over and over.

If the CV rework was so important to the haters, they would give reasonable points and suggestions which could actually be considered for a change.

You (anti cv crowd) care about the state of the game? Then stop being lazy and shouting lazy ideas.

Stop shouting remove or isolate!

Come up with your own ideas how to better the situation without saying lazy things like unbalanceable.

 

How can you possibly think that removing or isolating CVs is the only reasonable thing to do while claiming you care for the game?

Caring for the state of the game means to also care about all of it's playerbase. If you don't give a ☆ about the enjoyment of CV players because they "ruin" your game then you are not caring for them, not the game, not it's rules but only for yourself.

 

and before you say "But you as a cV player who ruins others peoples enjoyment also doesn't care right?"

No, i care. I play CV because it's fun for me, other players and to provide WG with the data they need to balance them correctly while learning and teaching other players about the reworkes class, how to play and avoid it.

[El2aZeR]

2 hours ago, Hurricane_tb said:

How can a CV even get a 13,6 k drop on a DD?

 

Each bomb deals 11,2k alpha strike. Because Midway HE bombs can never hit citadels, they'll top out at ~3,7k penetration damage per bomb. If you then account for damage saturation along with assuming every bomb dealt damage and did not get denied by a module 13,6k damage is 4 hits out of a possible 6.

 

As for how you got hit by 4 out of 6 bombs, ask this guy:

 

1 hour ago, WynnZeroOne said:

There are a small crowd who must genuinely believe that there can be a rollback and to this end have no interest in feedback or balance, just undermining any sort of progress or efforts to discuss improvement.

 

Attempting to discuss a system that is fundamentally flawed is futile. Why even waste the effort? A class that, unlike their predecessors, has no counterplay options nor exploitable flaws doesn't belong in this game period. I laugh in the face of all the counterplay options suggested by people on forums or elsewhere. "Just smoke, play Mino/Worcester with full AA build, stick in a blob" etc. are all very cute because I know they do not work from a CV perspective. Nothing prevents you from getting killed by a CV.

In fact the most laughable thing about the rework is that CVs now counter AA ships by not only killing them fairly easily but denying their inherent playstyle. Attempting to play from island cover is comically suicidal against someone who actually knows what they're doing.

 

No one (or at least almost no one) really believes that a rollback will happen. We just understand that, as flawed as it was, the previous iteration was the superior system. Attempting to strike AA ships on the CN server will do nothing but get me deplaned and that is as it should be. It is one of the prices I'm supposed to pay for all the advantages I have as a CV.

Here on the other hand I don't give a  and will kill you with negligible plane losses. Please tell me, how is this supposed to be better than before and how do you even begin to balance something which is fundamentally built on the principle that a CV can always  all over everything else?

 

To put this into perspective, just recently I faced a double unicum Seattle div in my Enterprise. That would've been a daunting perspective in the RTS iteration, but in the rework I knew precisely that they've just ed themselves over by choosing AA cruisers funnily enough.

So I proceeded to kill them both. While they stuck together and coordinated DFAA usage. All for a paltry amount of planes lost on my part which didn't matter anyway as I ended the match with full squads. And I can only ask again, how exactly is this rework more fair or even remotely worth discussing?

 

As long as you cannot convince us of that, there is nothing to discuss.

[Sunleader]

2 hours ago, WynnZeroOne said:

snip

 

If you wanna talk about my Person pls open a Private Blog or something.

Inside here. I will Answer you on the Topic of the CV Rework and Correct you when you Post False or Misleading Information.

Thats all there is to it.

[anonym_WQDIB9XrzbSp]

21 minutes ago, Sunleader said:

Zzzzz

Again, avoiding the fact that your behavior is repulsive and contribution questionable.

 

Again, with the talking about your person. What's up poppet? Don't like being chastised for behaving like a spoiled child? Probably ought to stop jumping on my posts just because you tried arguing a discussion down yesterday and were embarrased in public. Get over yourself, seriously.

[Yosha_AtaIante]

Vor 4 Minuten, WynnZeroOne sagte:

Again, avoiding the fact that your behavior is repulsive and contribution questionable.

 

Again, with the talking about your person. What's up poppet? Don't like being chastised for behaving like a spoiled child? Probably ought to stop jumping on my posts just because you tried arguing a discussion down yesterday and were embarrased in public. Get over yourself, seriously.

What did i miss? A discussion, like a real one? Where?

[anonym_WQDIB9XrzbSp]

36 minutes ago, El2aZeR said:

 

Each bomb deals 11,2k alpha strike. Because Midway HE bombs can never hit citadels, they'll top out at ~3,7k penetration damage per bomb. If you then account for damage saturation along with assuming every bomb dealt damage and did not get denied by a module 13,6k damage is 4 hits out of a possible 6.

 

As for how you got hit by 4 out of 6 bombs, ask this guy:

 

 

 

Attempting to discuss a system that is fundamentally flawed is futile. Why even waste the effort? A class that, unlike their predecessors, has no counterplay options nor exploitable flaws doesn't belong in this game period. I laugh in the face of all the counterplay options suggested by people on forums or elsewhere. "Just smoke, play Mino/Worcester with full AA build, stick in a blob" etc. are all very cute because I know they do not work from a CV perspective. Nothing prevents you from getting killed by a CV.

In fact the most laughable thing about the rework is that CVs now counter AA ships by not only killing them fairly easily but denying their inherent playstyle. Attempting to play from island cover is comically suicidal against someone who actually knows what they're doing.

 

No one (or at least almost no one) really believes that a rollback will happen. We just understand that, as flawed as it was, the previous iteration was the superior system. Attempting to strike AA ships on the CN server will do nothing but get me deplaned and that is as it should be. It is one of the prices I'm supposed to pay for all the advantages I have as a CV.

 Here on the other hand I don't give a  and will kill you with negligible plane losses. Please tell me, how is this supposed to be better than before and how do you even begin to balance something which is fundamentally built on the principle that a CV can always  all over everything else?

 

To put this into perspective, just recently I faced a double unicum Seattle div in my Enterprise. That would've been a daunting perspective in the RTS iteration, but in the rework I knew precisely that they've just ed themselves over by choosing AA cruisers funnily enough.

So I proceeded to kill them both. While they stuck together and coordinated DFAA usage. All for a paltry amount of planes lost on my part which didn't matter anyway as I ended the match with full squads. And I can only ask again, how exactly is this rework more fair or even remotely worth discussing?

 

As long as you cannot convince us of that, there is nothing to discuss.

|At least you're having a discussion and offering feedback. 

[anonym_WQDIB9XrzbSp]

7 minutes ago, L0V3_and_PE4CE said:

 What did i miss? A discussion, like a real one? Where?

Tried a discussion, people just seem to want to troll. I see a recurring theme. Some people just refuse to accept that others are entitled to a differing opinion.

 

I note that Sobchaak has changed his name to Sunleader earlier though, perhaps the embarrassment got to much 

 

 

[Yosha_AtaIante]

@El2aZeR

Thanks for your post. I will take the Enterprise into training room and practice killing t8 - 10 AA bots on highest difficulty and report back to you how long it will take me to be able to consistently do so.

If i ever manage to consistently kill one lone seattle in 5 minutes i will admit that it's unbalanceable which would be a lie

[Yosha_AtaIante]

Gerade eben, WynnZeroOne sagte:

Tried a discussion, people just seem to want to troll. I see a recurring theme. Some people just refuse to accept that others are entitled to a differing opinion.

 

I note that Sobchaak has changed his name to Sunleader earlier though, perhaps the embarrassment got to much 

 

 

OHHHH THATS HIM? O m g really?

 

☆♡☆ my life that is hilarious xD

[anonym_WQDIB9XrzbSp]

3 hours ago, Hurricane_tb said:

So I just took a 13,6 k from Midway BOMBERS in my Gearing. 10 sec later, another 7,3 k and then the final blow. And yes, def AA was active. Felt good. I felt engaged in the whole time and being rewarded for trying to cap aka playing the objective.

 

How can a CV even get a 13,6 k drop on a DD? Even if it is as thick as a Gearing, this is ridicolous... (not just this, but this in particular)

Gearing seemed fine in PT? Was great fun watching CV's focus me and lose 40 planes per game. If anything it felt like the CV's were overnerfed, I really should not be shredding planes THAT easily in a DD.

[AndyHill]

As for suggestions on how to improve carrier gameplay and make it "balanced", I don't have any, since I just can't think of a way. And what does "balanced" even mean in a case like this, when the real problem is carriers destroying concealment plays and making the game far less interesting and dynamic? Also if you have the ability to poop on anyone anytime anywhere without possibility for counterplay, how much damage is "balanced" and acceptable? To me that number is 0, I just don't see why something like that should exist to begin with. 

 

I can't prove that carriers are entirely and eternally unfit to be part of this game, but we know from history what happened to surface ships when carriers arrived on the scene and we have two iterations of in-game implementations and I'm yet to be convinced that there is any way to make either of them compatible with the rest of the game. All I know is that adjustments to damage, starting delays (less than 20 minutes) or plane speed (within feasible range) will not help, even minimap-only spotting would be enough to spoil all too many of the clever and exciting concealment plays.

 

So yes, I would like to offer suggestions on making things better for everyone, I just don't have any idea of what they could possibly be. What I do know is that games without carriers around tend to be vastly more enjoyable than the ones with. 

[Yosha_AtaIante]

Vor 5 Minuten, WynnZeroOne sagte:

Gearing seemed fine in PT? Was great fun watching CV's focus me and lose 40 planes per game. If anything it felt like the CV's were overnerfed, I really should not be shredding planes THAT easily in a DD.

PT? Of the new patch?

I can assure you you won't be able to defend yourself against me if i attacked you in the midway.

This must have been an average player that attacked you.

 

[Captain_Lootbox]

I like the CV gameplay since the rework.  Its easy and very user friendly.  The thing is, I find it far too easy to play CV than compared to other game modes now.  I feel like my unlimited planes are a problem.  I don't care how many planes I lose in an attack run because I know that they will be getting replaced.  Before the rework I had to be concerned about plane losses because they weren't getting replaced.

[1MajorKoenig]

8 hours ago, AndyHill said:

Ok, now this is getting more interesting since we're actually at the relevant part of the topic. A unique experience and more immersion are positive things, but then again unique can be problematic, like for example in the case of RTS carriers WG felt (and I kind of agree) that RTS carriers weren't very popular among the playerbase - which led to the issue of a few masterful players stomping all over everything else - due to how different they were to play. Immersion is a bit more challenging to quantify, but what if the game had for example lots of AI aircraft striking some made-up ground targets? Really nice looking and sounding, massive airstrikes pounding the ground with flak bursting all over. Would that not be impressive as well as immersive in the same way current carriers are?

 

Also how do you feel about the role of concealment in WoWS? To me concealment is the only thing that stands between two static blobs firing at each other on Ocean and everything that detracts from that detracts from the game directly. If the enemy knows you're trying to make a sneaky play and can react to it, there's no point in trying to make a play. To me this is the worst aspect of carriers at the moment, even worse than getting pooped on with no counterplay.

 

WG has plenty of options if they want to change the spotting aspect 

[1MajorKoenig]

4 hours ago, El2aZeR said:

To put this into perspective, just recently I faced a double unicum Seattle div in my Enterprise. That would've been a daunting perspective in the RTS iteration, but in the rework I knew precisely that they've just ed themselves over by choosing AA cruisers funnily enough.

So I proceeded to kill them both. While they stuck together and coordinated DFAA usage. All for a paltry amount of planes lost on my part which didn't matter anyway as I ended the match with full squads. And I can only ask again, how exactly is this rework more fair or even remotely worth discussing?

 

So are you just saying Big E’s AP bombs and Midway’s HE bombs are broken? 

[159Hunter]

9 minutes ago, 1MajorKoenig said:

So are you just saying Big E’s AP bombs and Midway’s HE bombs are broken? 

You still refuse to read what he's saying?  I've highlighted the important phrases for you:

- First quote: CVs (not big E, not Midway but CV as a class) are flawed and have no counterplay

- Second quote: RTS CVs were less broken than current iteration

4 hours ago, El2aZeR said:

Attempting to discuss a system that is fundamentally flawed is futile. Why even waste the effort? A class that, unlike their predecessors, has no counterplay options nor exploitable flaws doesn't belong in this game period. I laugh in the face of all the counterplay options suggested by people on forums or elsewhere. "Just smoke, play Mino/Worcester with full AA build, stick in a blob" etc. are all very cute because I know they do not work from a CV perspective. Nothing prevents you from getting killed by a CV.

In fact the most laughable thing about the rework is that CVs now counter AA ships by not only killing them fairly easily but denying their inherent playstyle. Attempting to play from island cover is comically suicidal against someone who actually knows what they're doing.

 

No one (or at least almost no one) really believes that a rollback will happen. We just understand that, as flawed as it was, the previous iteration was the superior system. Attempting to strike AA ships on the CN server will do nothing but get me deplaned and that is as it should be. It is one of the prices I'm supposed to pay for all the advantages I have as a CV.

Here on the other hand I don't give a  and will kill you with negligible plane losses. Please tell me, how is this supposed to be better than before and how do you even begin to balance something which is fundamentally built on the principle that a CV can always  all over everything else?

 

[Culiacan_Mexico]

4 hours ago, L0V3_and_PE4CE said:

If the CV rework was so important to the haters, they would give reasonable points and suggestions which could actually be considered for a change.

I don't know if I fall in the CV hater crowd, but...

 

To your statement... no.  

 

In the past, a tactic used by some RTS CV players when discussing this ship type, in anyway, was to that state unless you played CV extensively then your opinion was invalid. This of course was ridiculous, because someone who has never played CV can still see some of the effects of CVs on the overall game through observation.  However when it come down to changing CV in specific ways, to alter their capabilities, lack of experience limits ones ability to understand the details.  El2aZeR, Farazelleth, and others gave detailed suggestions on how RTS CVs could be altered to improve overall game play, and can undoubtedly do the same with the current CVs, but those with limited to no experience or skill really can only guess about changes but little else.

 

 

[1MajorKoenig]

14 minutes ago, 159Hunter said:

You still refuse to read what he's saying?  I've highlighted the important phrases for you:

- First quote: CVs (not big E, not Midway but CV as a class) are flawed and have no counterplay

- Second quote: RTS CVs were less broken than current iteration

 

 

I don’t refuse to read but you are not bringing anything. No counterplay? There is still this stupid RNG AA just like before. How is that inherent to the rework 

[1MajorKoenig]

16 minutes ago, Culiacan_Mexico said:

El2aZeR, Farazelleth, and others gave detailed suggestions on how RTS CVs could be altered to improve overall game play

 

Of course they could. Because they mastered this part of the game. Thing is: that was not what the rest of the game wanted.

 

Your point is really questionable. Do I need to play Slava myself to see it will likely be broken as hell? Not really