CV Rework Discussion

[El2aZeR]

1 minute ago, xxNihilanxx said:

Move the replay you want out of the "replays" folder (in my case I just copy it to my desktop) - et voila! Working replay!

 

What are you, a wizard?

[Yosha_AtaIante]

Not working for me, i downloaded it from my dropbox it wasnt in my folder originally and didn't work. The game i tried to watch is 1 day old.

[Hundigo]

4 hours ago, L0V3_and_PE4CE said:

There are to many people here who choose the lazy option of saying "not able to be balanced".

I respect El2aZeRs opinions but i'm very sure that you can balance it.

What most of you are forgetting is that just because you all agree  each other for the CV rework to be simply flawed that this doesn't mean that nothing can be done because of that agreement.

WG will find ways to make it work and they will not tweak it until El2aZeR suddenly can only manage average dmg because he is a super unicum

CV inherently flawed my ☆.

But continue on circling around while giving no ideas at all on how to improve it all.

I so wish btw that they get back to RTS. There was less crying, i don't care for less CVs anyways but i will ☆ up your game regardless of RTS or reworked CVs. You won't be in AA ships 24/7 anymore once again and it will be as easy as it is now if not easier.

From the moment WG would 'even' be able to 'balance' the game with CV's ? What most of us doubt already because they couldn't at the start on the metaservers of it. Even WG had already the knowledge of the problems they give in the game from the 'testers' and later on the 'testservers'. 

 

You forget that WG self had already more then 1 year intern, when only the empoyees of WG played them to see how it would go in the game. 

Then you had the 'testers' in enviroments where other players couldn't enter = "Work in progress". 

Then you had the specifique 'testrounds' with various players, hardcore CV players and regular other vessel players. 

Then you had the 'announcements' of the launch of the rework CV style , when even normally players react on it and described already what would causes game problems. Even the simply first stream, to show all the players the CV rework , created reactions on what game effects it would have. They weren't possitive at all. 

Then you had the launch of the rework CV on the meta servers. Immediattely reaction and different recorded gameplays on you tube and other channels how bad the rework is for the game. 

Then you had the different 'hotfixes'. Notabene the first one not even the full week later of the launch. 

And on top of that , you have already 3 new updates and the fourth one , 08.04, is also verry near. 

 

It's not just one ship they have to 'buff' or to 'nerf', it's a whole class. And when you look back to it from the start, that's Always been the case for the whole CV rework, and is still going on in the future. 08.04 is also one of them. Shall it solve the issue's with the CV's ? Many players doubt about it. 

 

So how much time WG shall still need to 'balance' things ? 

At some point now, yes players came to the conclusion , it's never gonna be able to balance it and it shall Always give problems. So in the longrun, when WG shall continue to 'balance' them, CV rework shall fail because none of the community shall play then perhaps only the verry high skilled players in it. Then WG failed openly with their whole rework , because their goal was just to attract more players with it. 

 

To give you another example, lower tiers can give you 2 to 3 CV players in each team. WG can't solve , was their explanation. But for the tier 10 games, only 1 CV allowed. How come they can do that only for the tier 10's and not for the rest ? Did you ever do the math ? When they lower tiers also grind the tier 10 CV's, then WG shall have to allowe them also in the game. So within 4 to 6 months from now, you also gonna have 2 or even more CV's in the tier 10 matches. Even WG declared it's maximum 1 CV in the highest tier 

 

 

[Sunleader]

1 hour ago, 1MajorKoenig said:

 

You only said you can engage any opponent which isn’t surprising as you are an experienced player and is frankly not different to any other class.

You didn’t say why in your opinion the rework can not be balanced. You just claimed it.

 

I do think that I explained that several times.

 

Short version to jog the Memory.

 

In the current System with the CV having Manual Control over a Squadron that moves at 100-200 knots.

No Ship will ever be able to Deny that Squadron a Hit by Maneuvering.

The CV may sometimes miss. Because he is Inexperienced and has not learned how to Aim properly with Squadrons yet.

But on part of the Surface Ship there is no Countermeasures against a CV.

 

Due to that the only measure is on Automatic AA.

But Automatic AA or even the Sector AA. Is something that works as either Kill or Useless.

Because it either is Strong enough to kill Bombers. Or it is not Strong enough to kill them.

 

Hence. No matter how you adjust it.

It will always be either CV is OP and cannot be Defended against.

Or CV is useless cause his Bombers dont reach.

 

 

We either need to return to the old System.

Or we need a new System.

The current System is just not going to work.

 

 

Of course if you got an Idea how to actually fix this.

And actually add a system where the Surface Ship can Succesfully Defend itself against a Bombing Run if he reacts correctly but where at the same time the CV is not made useless.

 

Your welcome to share it.

We currently dont see any way to pull this off.

[HaachamaShipping]

42 minutes ago, El2aZeR said:

 

They actually tried that.

I'm not even joking.

I know. Instead of damecon. For whatever reasons. Guess automated repair was too hard to code properly though.

[1MajorKoenig]

5 hours ago, AndyHill said:

Which of the available options do you feel would be most effective in allowing people to make moves by controlling their concealment when carriers are in play?

 

I would conduct a test on the “transmit Recon to team” button with a time of transmission “X” and a Cooldown “y”. I wouldn’t Limit the Consumable in charges just govern it via transmission duration and Cooldown. 

 

Another interesting proposal by @Pikkozoikum was to remove spotting from all strike planes and add a new squadron dedicated to spotting but being unarmed. I would test that as well.

 

 

[Hugh_Ruka]

5 hours ago, L0V3_and_PE4CE said:

There are to many people here who choose the lazy option of saying "not able to be balanced".

I respect El2aZeRs opinions but i'm very sure that you can balance it.

What most of you are forgetting is that just because you all agree  each other for the CV rework to be simply flawed that this doesn't mean that nothing can be done because of that agreement.

WG will find ways to make it work and they will not tweak it until El2aZeR suddenly can only manage average dmg because he is a super unicum

CV inherently flawed my ☆.

But continue on circling around while giving no ideas at all on how to improve it all.

I so wish btw that they get back to RTS. There was less crying, i don't care for less CVs anyways but i will ☆ up your game regardless of RTS or reworked CVs. You won't be in AA ships 24/7 anymore once again and it will be as easy as it is now if not easier.

You cannot balance something that is flawed at the design level. The issues are designed in as a direct result of the wrong set of goals WG set for the rework.

 

If we have to work in the envelope of the set goals (single avatar at all times, arcade game style) then we cannot do better. CVs unfortunately work on a completely different level to surface combatants as they are only loosely coupled with their armament (i.e. they don't have to be present at the place of attack) and they can actually control and direct their armament during the attack (you cannot steer torps as a DD f.e., same with shells).

 

Simply put, since CVs follow some exceptional mechanics, they need to be balanced by other exceptional mechanics. That however leads to an unbalanced system as CV as a class follows different rules to other classes and we are back to the RTS control style that was abandoned by WG.

 

Yes it is possible to get CVs into good shape and play nicely but not in the current mechanics.

[1MajorKoenig]

4 hours ago, El2aZeR said:

The fundamental gameplay of the rework is built around the CV always being able to deal severe damage unless in the most extreme situations (which would be e.g. a bunch of 6+ capital ships with good AA all in one spot). This means there are no effective counterplay options to reworked CVs.

2. Reworked CVs play solely for themselves and have no true team supporting abilities. This is exacerbated by CVs being fundamentally incapable of effectively opposing each other. In what is supposed to be a team game this is unacceptable.

3. Reworked CVs have no true downsides nor limitations when played competently. Unlike their predecessors they can be anywhere at the right time if the situation calls for it, ironically giving them even higher flexibility and power. Likewise plane losses can be severely mitigated and play practically no part in their tactical play anymore. Hull survivability too has been improved to the extreme.

4. Because these are the principles reworked CV play is built upon they cannot be altered without severely compromising the rework one way or another (which is e.g. what your suggestions above would do). As such it is unfeasible to even attempt saving it, the only viable option is to scrap it completely. What happens after that is up in the air (rollback, complete removal, something entirely new etc

 

Not sure where you are getting these from but these are certainly not the rework principals

[1MajorKoenig]

4 hours ago, Sunleader said:

 

Rather than not wanting to.

Its more of an issue of how to do it.

 

 

If you give manual control to the Player and gets halfwat accurate Guns for AA.

It will soon be so that CVs wont get any Drops done. Because the Aircraft dont really have much variety in movement.

They always come at same height etc.

So just like in Navyfield you will soon face a situation where Players will easily massacre a whole Squadron in a few Salvos.

 

If you make the AA Guns inaccurate so the Player misses despite Aiming right.

You end up with the same problem as now where Surface Ships are Helpless against Attacks.

 

So you would need to also advance Aircraft Controls and Maneuvering to allow for evasion and attacks from different angles.

 

 

This would basicly be a whole new Rework.

 

You could position it as a trade off. Leave AA manual at mediocre efficiency and manoeuvre well or take manual control of AA and spend less focus on manoeuvring with the known risks 

[MRGTB]

They should release Jean-Luc Picard for the Enterprise CV as a special captain

[1MajorKoenig]

58 minutes ago, Sunleader said:

 

I do think that I explained that several times.

 

Short version to jog the Memory.

 

In the current System with the CV having Manual Control over a Squadron that moves at 100-200 knots.

No Ship will ever be able to Deny that Squadron a Hit by Maneuvering.

The CV may sometimes miss. Because he is Inexperienced and has not learned how to Aim properly with Squadrons yet.

But on part of the Surface Ship there is no Countermeasures against a CV.

 

Due to that the only measure is on Automatic AA.

But Automatic AA or even the Sector AA. Is something that works as either Kill or Useless.

Because it either is Strong enough to kill Bombers. Or it is not Strong enough to kill them.

 

Hence. No matter how you adjust it.

It will always be either CV is OP and cannot be Defended against.

Or CV is useless cause his Bombers dont reach.

 

 

We either need to return to the old System.

Or we need a new System.

The current System is just not going to work.

 

 

Of course if you got an Idea how to actually fix this.

And actually add a system where the Surface Ship can Succesfully Defend itself against a Bombing Run if he reacts correctly but where at the same time the CV is not made useless.

 

Your welcome to share it.

We currently dont see any way to pull this off.

 

Just what I thought - not a single good reason. Oh dear where to start:

 

- so yo can’t “evade” a CV attack? Of course you can evade. Not each and every strike but you can’t eveade all shells in any other ship either 

 

- “only Auto AA” - same General issue as old version but do you have Auto defense against incoming BB shells? No...? But I give you that the AA system sucks balls and is in need of a complete rework. But nevertheless - it’s not “the rework” either

 

- either way none of the above is “inherent to the rework” hence this “can’t be balanced” fairy tale is just  that (more of a “I want something else” fairy tale)

 

and once and for all - the old RTS system wasn’t any better. It was just that nobody gave a damn because nobody played it 

[HaachamaShipping]

25 minutes ago, TheScarletPimpernel said:

They should release Jean-Luc Picard for the Enterprise CV as a special captain

But we already got an Enterprise captain.

[El2aZeR]

39 minutes ago, 1MajorKoenig said:

Not sure where you are getting these from but these are certainly not the rework principals

 

Uh huh, and you're denying this based on what exactly?

[ApolloF117]

15 minutes ago, 1MajorKoenig said:

- so yo can’t “evade” a CV attack? Of course you can evade. Not each and every strike but you can’t eveade all shells in any other ship either 

thats when armor comes in, so the shells that hit you A bounce off, B shatter, C overpen, D  pen, , or how do you angle against ap bombs to bounce off?:D

 

38 minutes ago, 1MajorKoenig said:

Not sure where you are getting these from but these are certainly not the rework principals

then what are those?

then you must know it and you can tell us what were WGs big CV Rework principals, so we can finally end this by suggesting according tho those principals

[1MajorKoenig]

1 minute ago, El2aZeR said:

 

Uh huh, and you're denying this based on what exactly?

 

Wrong question - where did you get these from?

 

Comparing these to what WG stated as their targets they are pretty off. Hence the question where you got them from (let me guess: your own impression/interpretation of the results - which is not necessarily a principle)

[ApolloF117]

Just now, 1MajorKoenig said:

Comparing these to what WG stated as their targets they are pretty off

lol, wg and thier states :D soo many times soo many ppl faling for them.... when will you learn, guess you haven't played thier games long enough

[El2aZeR]

4 minutes ago, 1MajorKoenig said:

Wrong question - where did you get these from?

 

My own experience with the rework and game design.

 

4 minutes ago, 1MajorKoenig said:

Comparing these to what WG stated as their targets they are pretty off.

 

They also said the skill gap between experienced and beginner CV captains is too high, yet now the skill gap is the performance gap of a player in the ship classes they play.

Or back when they introduced RTS AP bombs they said their performance is fine, yet now they've been labeled as a toxic mechanic.

 

You must be delusional to still believe in whatever WG says.

[1MajorKoenig]

3 minutes ago, ApolloF117 said:

thats when armor comes in, so the shells that hit you A bounce off, B shatter, C overpen, D  pen, , or how do you angle against ap bombs to bounce off?:D

 

then what are those?

then you must know it and you can tell us what were WGs big CV Rework principals, so we can finally end this by suggesting according tho those principals

 

WG stated multiple times they want to:

- make CVs more popular (compared to the RTS state of the union mind you)

- more accessible for new players 

- reduce the impact of a good CV player 

- reduce the impact of having two not equally skilled CV players facing each other (which was unfortunately coined as “skillgap” which is not necessarily the problem itself but the term was used)

 

As means to achieve this WG decided to:

- reduce alpha damage drastically and emphasize DoT to partially compensate 

- mostly eliminate multi tasking by controlling only one strike squadron 

- remove CV vs CV interaction mostly to it shut down each other 

- eliminate deplaning

- introduce a more immersive 1st person view compared to the rather unattractive RTS interface 

[Hundigo]

38 minutes ago, 1MajorKoenig said:

 

Just what I thought - not a single good reason. Oh dear where to start:

 

*SNIP*

 

and once and for all - the old RTS system wasn’t any better. It was just that nobody gave a damn because nobody played it 

This could be true, but when it goes further like it is now. More players play the CV's then within a few months they also end up in the tier 10 matches. And if you postforward the numbers in the lower tiers to the tier 10 games, then you end up with more then 1 CV also in these games. So a lot of tier 10 players now , doesn't give a damn anymore about the lower tiers. Till the, now lower tiers, CV's  shall show up also in theire matches, like the tier 10 games, clanbattle's, ranked battle's, scenario battle's and even in the co-op battle's. Then you shall see a huge amount of players that gives a damm about what is going on. 

WG could , in their own words "restrict" CV's in certain games. It was in reallity not a restriction at all. They just had the lack of CV players. Just the same with the 'restriction of only one CV restriction in the tier 10 games. WG simply doesn't  has the amount of CV players for it yet. But they shall come. And then the players  shall give a damm about it. 

 

It's already written many times in the past; it's gonna be a totally 'nerf' for the CV class that almost none shall play them in the future, like in the old RTS style and then indeed none shall give a damm,  or it shall be a class that's never gonna be able to be balanced with the other classes in the game. 

[El2aZeR]

2 minutes ago, 1MajorKoenig said:

-snip-

 

Goals are now gameplay principles.

Okay.

[1MajorKoenig]

1 minute ago, El2aZeR said:

 

Goals are now gameplay principles.

Okay.

 

I see you are interested in a civilized discussion 

 

Goals are what define the measures and principles. 

[El2aZeR]

6 minutes ago, 1MajorKoenig said:

I see you are interested in a civilized discussion 

 

Is that all you can say after failing to show us the supposed gameplay principles of the rework, mistaking WG's goals for them instead?

 

6 minutes ago, 1MajorKoenig said:

Goals are what define the measures and principles. 

 

Good to see you know how to separate goals from gameplay principles.

Still means you failed to show them to us.

[AirSupremacy]

IMHO in a perfect CV rework there is a CV

which carries another players Uboat inside its CV belly as mobile restock dock :D

 

[ApolloF117]

7 minutes ago, AirSupremacy said:

which carries another players Uboat inside its CV belly as mobile restock dock :D

so u want an i-400?:D

[Toivia]

18 minutes ago, 1MajorKoenig said:

 

WG stated multiple times they want to:

- make CVs more popular (compared to the RTS state of the union mind you)

- more accessible for new players 

- reduce the impact of a good CV player 

- reduce the impact of having two not equally skilled CV players facing each other (which was unfortunately coined as “skillgap” which is not necessarily the problem itself but the term was used)

 

As means to achieve this WG decided to:

- reduce alpha damage drastically and emphasize DoT to partially compensate 

- mostly eliminate multi tasking by controlling only one strike squadron 

- remove CV vs CV interaction mostly to it shut down each other 

- eliminate deplaning

- introduce a more immersive 1st person view compared to the rather unattractive RTS interface 

Yeah, that's what WG stated. Meanwhile they only achieved 2 goals out of 4. Clearly good CV players (as shown all over this thread) have even more of an influence on a match than before (hence even crazier WR numbers than in RTS) yet potatoes get even worse results. That last point kinda makes me even question whether the new CVs are really "more accessible for new players". Personally I thought so, but then I look at the stuff happening in battles and... well.

 

Also you forgot to mention the drastically increased DPM of CVs. Previously they may have gotten large alpha strikes off every couple minutes, now they keep getting damage every couple dozen seconds. Very steady DMG.