CV Rework Discussion

[Yosha_AtaIante]

Vor 2 Minuten, Excavatus sagte:

how about, leaving the flaks as it is and give the control of the med and short range continuous damage guns' control to the player.

I dreamed about that idea before. It would be fun...

 

Depending on the situation and the CV... I sometimes does not care about a CV attack at all..
sometimes I drop anything I'm doing at the moment and try to defend myself. So in this kind of a situation, I'd gladly go into FPS AA perspective and try to kill those pesky AP bombers closing to my ship :)

Lets review this idea because i like it. 

 

Keep the squadron in a square you aim with your mouse for a 100% continueous dmg increase as long as the aimed square is on the planes(the planes within it) 

 

How do you like this approach? 

You can immedietly stop and continues dmg will resume normally

[Sunleader]

Meanwhile I am Farming Money.

Too bad I have to Work. Because currently I am getting 1 Million and more for each Game with my Graf Zeppelin.

 

 

 

 

Best Win Today.

 

Spoiler

 

 

And the Team Today which just could not be Carried no matter how hard I tried....

 

Spoiler

 

 

 

But Man.

As a T8 CV in a T8 Battle I feel like I am a Filthy SealClubber.

If your not Uptiered to T10 in a T8 CV they could just as well Remove AA of other Ships alltogether.

It would make barely any Difference....

 

 

 

 

4 minutes ago, Excavatus said:

how about, leaving the flaks as it is and give the control of the med and short range continuous damage guns' control to the player.

I dreamed about that idea before. It would be fun...

 

Depending on the situation and the CV... I sometimes does not care about a CV attack at all..
sometimes I drop anything I'm doing at the moment and try to defend myself. So in this kind of a situation, I'd gladly go into FPS AA perspective and try to kill those pesky AP bombers closing to my ship :)

 

I would actually Support a Similar System to War Thunder.

Where the Player can Take Cycle through his Armaments.

 

I fear however nothing of the Sort will happen.

Because I dont think that WoWs actually even has a System in place that would allow Aircraft to be Shot down like this.

Aircraft are not able to change Altitude and I am not even sure they have an Actual Proper Hitbox that would allow you to actually Shoot at them rather than just Shooting in their Rough Direction.

[Yosha_AtaIante]

Amazing work @Sunleader

[Beaker71]

In a BB with 30s between each shell, perhaps. In a DD with 4s between each shell (not to mention trying to dodge rockets at the same time) - nope

[Panocek]

2 minutes ago, L0V3_and_PE4CE said:

Lets review this idea because i like it. 

 

Keep the squadron in a square you aim with yout mouse for a 100% continueous dmg increase as long as the aimed square is on the planes(the planes within it) 

 

How do you like this approach? 

You can immedietly stop and continues dmg will resume normally

But doesn't it conflict with

17 minutes ago, L0V3_and_PE4CE said:

No you whiny bretzel!!! 

Only AA needs to be automated as it is so YOU CAN FOCUS ON IMPORTANT STUFF happening in the battle instead of WORRYING ABOUT ROCKETS that hit you for 7k.... 

 

 

[Yosha_AtaIante]

Gerade eben, Panocek sagte:

But doesn't it conflict with

 

No, because you dont switch armaments and dont need to calculate shots, just hover over the planes while still keeping everything else in check

[Panocek]

Just now, L0V3_and_PE4CE said:

No, because you dont switch armaments and dont need to calculate shots, just hover over the planes while still keeping everything else in check

Still prevents you from aiming main armament or whatever you have in hand at the moment

[Excavatus]

6 minutes ago, L0V3_and_PE4CE said:

How do you like this approach? 

Basically it is built on the same idea what I presented.

So I like it :)

 

and by that way, every captain can feel they have a control about their air defense..

 

[Pikkozoikum]

12 minutes ago, L0V3_and_PE4CE said:

(..)

 

Everyone has the best ideas and knows it all but noone does it right

That's not true, I have the best ideas, not the others

[Yosha_AtaIante]

Vor 4 Minuten, Panocek sagte:

Still prevents you from aiming main armament or whatever you have in hand at the moment

NO CRAP BRO. 

Thats the price you gotta pay! 

But guess what it doesn't do? Mess with your brain and letting it keep focus on important battle tasks instead of calculatung planespeed and course for perfect shots LOL

[Pikkozoikum]

9 minutes ago, Sunleader said:

I would actually Support a Similar System to War Thunder.

Where the Player can Take Cycle through his Armaments.

I'm not that good in War Thudner, but isn't it more like "Have a good trainerd crew, and the ship AA one shots everything instant"?

At least I get always instanlty shot in War Thunder in Air to Ship combat. Flying around island and Bam, dead before I can even surprise the enemy. It's like I get surprised, while a surprise attack

[Yosha_AtaIante]

Vor 1 Minute, Pikkozoikum sagte:

I'm not that good in War Thudner, but isn't it more like "Have a good trainerd crew, and the ship AA one shots everything instant"?

At least I get always instanlty shot in War Thunder in Air to Ship combat. Flying around island and Bam, dead before I can even surprise the enemy. It's like I get surprised, while a surprise attack

Working as intended. You gotta dig your planes under ground for true suprise attack. Attach shovel to propeller

[Yedwy]

Not good, if you dont have more important crap to aim at then planes you are in a wrong position anyway, not to mention that striking lone campers would be a punishsble offense (those that dont have anything better to do) and that for all non campers it would be a distraction even worse then they are now as aside from spotting you and forcing turns you would actually have to focus on planes every 45s to actually shoot them down

[Pikkozoikum]

1 minute ago, Yedwy said:

Not good, if you font have more important crap to aim at then planes you are in a wrong position anyway, not to mention that striking lone campers would be a punishsble offense (those that dont have anything better to do) and that for all non campers it would be a distraction even worse then they are now

That's actually a true point, though I would still like it, because in a good team play, one or two ships could focus on air defense, while others fight.

 

I kinda did that in Steel OCean, when I played Oyodo. The Oyodo had tons of AA and was super in defending against air strikes :D

[Panocek]

6 minutes ago, L0V3_and_PE4CE said:

NO crap BRO. 

Thats the price you gotta pay! 

But guess what it doesn't do? Mess with your brain and letting it keeo focus on importabt battle tasks instead of calculatung planespeed and course for perfect shots LOL

Still you can't quite see where you're going by looking at the sky all the time

 

4 minutes ago, Pikkozoikum said:

I'm not that good in War Thudner, but isn't it more like "Have a good trainerd crew, and the ship AA one shots everything instant"?

At least I get always instanlty shot in War Thunder in Air to Ship combat. Flying around island and Bam, dead before I can even surprise the enemy. It's like I get surprised, while a surprise attack

That has more to do with balans way how crew works and how it totally can't be improved by feeding them doubloons golden eagles.

[Yedwy]

They can make it a skill same as MCFSA then, take it you get 100% extra if you take aim but without it you have 50% less

[Pikkozoikum]

3 minutes ago, Panocek said:

That has more to do with balans way how crew works and how it totally can't be improved by feeding them doubloons golden eagles.

Guess War Thunder is not even close to balance. But I don't really mind it, it should just make more fun. It's not fun, if you go for a naval combat, you barely get your 650 Spawnpoints to respawn as a plane, you get shot, bam, the whole fight no plane again. It's frustrating for playing a plane just a few seconds to get instant shot and then no plane again.

 

On the other hand, torpedos are too strong, a plane one shots a cruiser

[Yosha_AtaIante]

Vor 5 Minuten, Panocek sagte:

Still you can't quite see where you're going by looking at the sky all the time

 

The aim in your proposed system would likely be zoomed in for better results. Obscuring the view in the battle no? 

 

In Excavatus's proposal it would be normal ship view with a square as the mouse you would need to catch the planes with. You would still see everything and be able ti stear ship, use consumeables. 

 

Don't try to spin this to fish for a gotcha moment. I even need to work out how your idea needs to function for you to explain why it wouldn't work you lazy prezel

[Panocek]

1 minute ago, L0V3_and_PE4CE said:

The aim in your proposed system would likely be zoomed in for better results. Obscuring the view in the battle no? 

 

In Excavatus's proposal it would be normal ship view with a square as the mouse you would need to catch the planes with. You would still see everything and be able ti stear ship, use consumeables. 

 

Don't try to spin this to fish for a gotcha moment. I even need to work out how your idea needs to function for you to explain why it wouldn't work you lazy prezel

And how exactly you know detailed works of my version of "manual AA" when I haven't wrote it down, as writing suggestion and feedback for WG is bigger waste of keyboard than trolling you  and that's quite an achievement

 

4 minutes ago, Pikkozoikum said:

Guess War Thunder is not even close to balance. But I don't really mind it, it should just make more fun. It's not fun, if you go for a naval combat, you barely get your 650 Spawnpoints to respawn as a plane, you get shot, bam, the whole fight no plane again. It's frustrating for playing a plane just a few seconds to get instant shot and then no plane again.

 

On the other hand, torpedos are too strong, a plane one shots a cruiser

Spawn cost for aircraft was increased considerably due to incessant player REEE feedback about OP planes and "if I want to play planes I'd go air". And shouldn't torps be overall lethal? Its sort of "realistic", apparently the flavor WT players like

[Yosha_AtaIante]

Vor 5 Minuten, Panocek sagte:

And how exactly you know detailed works of my version of "manual AA" when I haven't wrote it down, as writing suggestion and feedback for WG is bigger waste of keyboard than trolling you  and that's quite an achievement

Now you play the trolling excuse after all else fails right? I would probably do the same Einstein! ☆

 

 

[Pikkozoikum]

7 minutes ago, Panocek said:

Spawn cost for aircraft was increased considerably due to incessant player REEE feedback about OP planes and "if I want to play planes I'd go air". And shouldn't torps be overall lethal? Its sort of "realistic", apparently the flavor WT players like

As long as I know can ship take torpedo hits without sinking. They could just fix the problem with making planes less op, but also AA maybe less op. That attempted Wargaming with the multiple strikes in a row, instead of all strikes at one moment. The CV can strike, but also the player can shoot down planes.

 

In Wargaming it is 70% - Plane gets instanted bursted away and 29% dropping torpedo, and die then. So it's almost always a suicide run. That's not really a good game design

[Panocek]

Just now, L0V3_and_PE4CE said:

Now you play the trolling excuse after all else fails right? I would probably do the same Einstein! ☆

 

 

 

Again, how you would know precise details of "manual flak" when none were provided?

[Yosha_AtaIante]

Vor 2 Minuten, Panocek sagte:

 

Again, how you would know precise details of "manual flak" when none were provided?

We can assume by the current limitations what would be the most logical while also possible approach without majorly changing any of the other currently present mechanics. 

There aren't many possibilities. 

[Pikkozoikum]

5 minutes ago, L0V3_and_PE4CE said:

We can assume by the current limitations what would be the most logical while also possible approach without majorly changing any of the other currently present mechanics. 

There aren't many possibilities. 

I would still go with making the burst damage componet aimed/manual and maybe increase the damage, since it can miss then

[El2aZeR]

1 hour ago, Pikkozoikum said:

I thought a nerf was wished, since everyone complaint on the strong AA?

 

Also it's a different mechanic. It's combined dps + burst dmg. And I would assume on the long run more people use sector switching than before. My aa-weak ships feel way stronger than before, but have no direct comparison with data

 

The nerf was wished for by potatoes who failed at playing CVs and continue to do so as proven by their laughable belief that 0.8.7 is an AA buff.

 

The burst damage is literally insignificant. Tests have proven that.

In fact in a couple of instances not using the sector reinforcement yielded more planes shot down due to it weakening the other side + attack immunity period. In all other instances it shot down the same amount of planes as not using it. It's literally a worthless mechanic.

 

And again, considering what you've so far based your experience on it cannot be trusted to say the least. Hard numbers prove that AA has been globally nerfed. This includes some weaker AA ships. In no instance did it actually get significantly stronger.