CV Rework Discussion

[veslingr]

8 hours ago, Sunleader said:

 

Did you Actually Read what I said ? :)

Damage alone is entirely Irrelevant.

Because you have no way to Check where that Damage was done.

10k Damage to a DD means that DD is Half Dead. 10k Damage to an Enemy BB means that BB is not even Impressed enough to Change Target to you.

 

Now. Conqueror will certainly do 10k Damage to an Enemy BB in this Situation.

But the only one able to just go ahead and Kill enemy DDs the same way is the CV.

 

Also Mate.

Someone already told you.

WoWs Numbers is Nice. But it Contains Data from the Past Years from Completely Different Situations.

 

If you want to get a Proper Grip on thins. Use Recent Data from Maplesyrup.

For example from here.

 

http://maplesyrup.sweet.coocan.jp/wows/ranking/20190928/eu_2month/average_class.html

 

And Guess what 63k to 61k

CVs and BBs in High Tier are Actually pretty much Equal in Damage.

So are Low Tier BBs and CVs.

 

But CVs as you can See get a Massively higher Experience Gain per Battle because they can a Crabton of other Jobs as well.

They for example do more Spotting Damage than DDs.

They also have a way Higher Kill Ratio per Match. And guess who has the Highest Defends Points ? Yep CVs again.

 

See Mate. You can Actually see that the Other Classes are Fairly Balanced in their Exp. Because while they Differ in Single Stats. They usually will beat other Classes in other Stats.

But CVs are Good at pretty much Everything Except being Hit by Enemies and Capturing Points.

 

 

Sorry Mate.

But the Facts are Against you.

CVs are Overpowered. That is a Fact which you yourself Admitted already by Equaling it to a 3 Person Division of other Ships.

Albeit of course that 3 Person Division never happened because you barely Play the Game and what little you Play is in CVs. Which basicly means you just Lied right into all of our Faces and made up these Claims up out of Thin Air.....

But well thats a Different Story I guess......

Do you know that Maple miss around 30% of data because it only watch solo games. Not single division game is calculated. 

 

Also comparing High tier is apsolutly wrong  you compare t9 ships with t 8 there. CV miss one tier. 

 

Also looking exp is bad. Some of modifiers are taking into acxount and CV have highest percentage of premium ship compared to silver ones. From t8 to t10 CV have 10 ships out of whoom 4 are premiums. It is 40%

 

And last part is totaly different story. 

[veslingr]

5 hours ago, El2aZeR said:

 

Wanna know what else is PvP game design?

Counterplay options.

 

Too bad reworked CVs have none.

 

 

Ah, and here I thought statistics are irrelevant?

CV ideš not have conter option, we talked before about that, because average wows player could not play with strike and fighters. Ro dumb it down they created this full strike BS. But hey everybody that cryed about RTS and strafing are probably having fun now. 

[El2aZeR]

11 minutes ago, veslingr said:

Do you know that Maple miss around 30% of data because it only watch solo games. Not single division game is calculated.

 

Wouldn't that mean maplesyrup provides more accurate data considering divisions can even make weak players look like unicums in terms of WR?

 

11 minutes ago, veslingr said:

Also looking exp is bad. Some of modifiers are taking into acxount and CV have highest percentage of premium ship compared to silver ones. From t8 to t10 CB have 10 ships out of whoom 4 are premiums. It is 40%

 

As far as modifiers go, CVs were buffed to have literally the same base exp modifier as BBs.

And while you're likely right with the percentage of premium ships, BBs are vastly more popular and as such will most likely outnumber CV premium ships in number of battles played relatively speaking. So technically BBs are more likely to earn more due to their premium ships than CVs are.

 

7 minutes ago, veslingr said:

But hey everybody that cryed about RTS and strafing are probably having fun now. 

 

In-ing-deed.

Some of whom are in this very thread. Should be obvious as to who.

[veslingr]

1 hour ago, MadBadDave said:

Clearly there is a lot of anger towards cv’s, and you have to ask the question will this thread ever end, even if WG finally got something right and it pleased everyone.

 

Cvs are and always will be OP it’s their nature, let’s face it they killed off the biggest and all BB’s with very little effort.

 

In game I hate cvs they have no counter play, and once spotted it’s totally up to the cv whether you live or die, by the what 3rd attack your aa is not existent you can’t run or hide, and since playing them  it’s noticeable how very easy it is to hit ships, and you can see why blobs formed, yes damage isn’t as high as citadelling a bb or cruiser but detonations are more common  and no amount of angling can prevent damage.

 

While aa diminishes plane availability and health does not, ie at the end of the game a winning cv will still have a full hp and it’s planes will be intact, a T10 bb will be battered and bruised with a lot of it’s aa destroyed. And then there’s the psychological impact of constantly being focused by a cv.

 

It won’t happen but cvs have to be removed.

It is not totally about CV if you live or die. It is totally up to you. CV has very little to say about it. He can not outplay 2-3 ship playing as team. 

 

Yes teamplay beats CV. Nothing new. 

 

 

When this thread will die?  When first sub citadel BBs

[mtm78]

1 minute ago, veslingr said:

When this thread game will die?  When first sub citadel BBs

 

ftfy

[veslingr]

1 minute ago, El2aZeR said:

 

Wouldn't that mean maplesyrup provides more accurate data considering divisions can even make weak players look like unicums?

 

 

As far as modifiers go, CVs were buffed to have literally the same base exp modifier as BBs.

And while you're likely right with the percentage of premium ships, BBs are vastly more popular and as such will most likely outnumber CV premium ships in number of battles played relatively speaking. So technically BBs are more likely to earn more due to their premium ships than CVs are.

 

 

In-ing-deed.

Some of whom are in this very thread. Should be obvious as to who.

I really do not know is extracting division good or bad thing but it is a fact that you miss solid piece of data. I would like to see whole picture. Also about premium ships if we look average number of play is not highly relevant but percentage of premium is. That's why I do not like EXP as data. If it can be boosted with camos it destroys the objective picture. Base EXP is more correct even we know some ships have internal modifier for base exp too. 

[veslingr]

3 minutes ago, mtm78 said:

 

ftfy

Ah I am not that pessimistic. Many will like subs. And crying on forum is nothing new. If forum is indicator when game will die it is dead from introducing of RPF skill  )

[El2aZeR]

5 minutes ago, veslingr said:

Yes teamplay beats CV. Nothing new. 

 

No. Not anymore.

Ironically the only thing that can beat skilled reworked CV players is their own team.

 

1 minute ago, veslingr said:

I really do not know is extracting division good or bad thing but it is a fact that you miss solid piece of data. I would like to see whole picture.

 

Even if said complete picture would be inaccurate?

For a rather extreme example:

https://forum.worldofwarships.eu/topic/102507-the-true-power-of-divisions/

 

Ofc division data also includes bad players divisioning and thus skewing overall stats downwards.

And ofc we'd be missing players who literally only play in divs.

But personally I believe solo stats give a better indication of overall performance.

 

5 minutes ago, veslingr said:

Also about premium ships if we look average number of play is not highly relevant but percentage of premium is. That's why I do not like EXP as data. If it can be boosted with camos it destroys the objective picture. Base EXP is more correct even we know some ships have internal modifier for base exp too.

 

Actually I just realized that would depend on how these averages are calculated.

If e.g. you calculated the average of all CVs then put them together percentage of premium ships becomes very relevant. (E.g. all CV premiums get 2000 exp, tech tree CVs only get 1000, so you'd get an average of 1400.)

However if it is calculated by battles played the amount of premium CVs becomes negligible due to the low amount of battles played in them. (5 battles in each premium CV earning 2000 exp, 20 battles played in each tech tree CV earning 1000, so average would be about 1142.)

 

Seems obvious in hindsight. It's early in the morning alright. Gonna need some caffeine.

 

I was under the impression that maplesyrup uses base exp?

[MadBadDave]

1 hour ago, veslingr said:

It is not totally about CV if you live or die. It is totally up to you. CV has very little to say about it. He can not outplay 2-3 ship playing as team. 

 

Yes teamplay beats CV. Nothing new. 

 

 

When this thread will die?  When first sub citadel BBs

Not even if cv focussed on 1 of the 3 and then another, with only the fear of losing worthless and easily replaced planes, if 3 ships are together they also represent an easier torp target (miss one get another), oh It is up to the cv, there is only so much wasd you can do, how do you angle to avoid damage when facing a plane ?.  I’ve played less than a dozen randoms and I’m already winning the game for my team, from the safety of afar.   How many good DD’s have died going after a cv, and yet they are the smallest, fastest and most manoeuvre-able ship type in the game, e.g when I’m in a dd I can avoid shots from multiple ships but I cannot avoid one attack from a carrier. 

 

The ship I sank to win the game had zero counter play it was my choice to target him, and target him I did until he was sunk, now if I was in another ship class I’d have taken damage and thought about continuing or withdrawing, in a cv you ask yourself what planes do I send next, torps or bombs, seconds later having taken off more hp you ask yourself the same question.

 

How is that not op ?.

 

You do however raise a good point about a sub citadelling a bb, especially given where the citadel sits, should be interesting, how many patches will it take to resolve that one ?

[mcboernester]

1 hour ago, El2aZeR said:

I was under the impression that maplesyrup uses base exp?

I think this is an API related issue. The Base XP is always modified by premium account for each user, even on weegees own player stats. Therefore XP gain isn't the best value if you want to compare stuff :| For Example i had like 3,1k last ranked sprint while my highest base XP in all games was around 2500 i think :P

 

 

 

 

Aside from that i feel like WG is trying to make certain ships of all 4 classes so cancer that CVs would fit right in. Smolensk / Kremlin / Colbert / Kleber / Thunderer are all full :pepega: Ships. They scale very hard with the person steering it, expecially Kleber and Colbert. Then again Ships like Thunderer / Kremlin / Smolensk  are so dumb by design that there's no excuse left for not pumping out at least 100k average Dmg since they are all broken by Design. Thunderer Guns are amazing , expecially when you use AP. Smolensk feels like a :serb: Emote and Kremlin cant even be constantly penned in melee range / is over the top beefy. You can also see how competent the balancing Department is when deciding " lets nerf Kremlin guns" while the issue is that this Thing just wont die! You can be so happy if you actually hit a citadel on a broadside kremlin.... jesus

 

 

 

 

[Merlin851526]

Well while this debate will ebb and flow. I can tell you it's no fun being in a game with 4 cv's and your ships AA is comprised of wishful thinking and bad language. That's the elephant in the room currently.

[1MajorKoenig]

2 hours ago, El2aZeR said:

 

Except it does. That was my entire point.

In balance playerskill is irrelevant because you assume that whatever mechanic you're designing will be used to its full potential. Hence why bad player stats are irrelevant while skilled player stats are the balancing benchmark.

 

 

Honestly you've lost me on this one. What lines?

 

As for your doubts for "average" players, it can in fact be proven. As I explained time and time again, just a quick look into the top 100 list maplesyrup provides will show a tremendous difference in stats when you compare between CVs and other classes, meaning that the CV playerbase isn't capable of filling even 100 slots with truly skilled players.

Likewise CV average stats are down, but top player stats have not changed much (if at all). Therefore the potential of CVs remains the same as before.

This means one of the following is true:

- CVs have become harder to play

- Average player skill is down the drain

 

Given that the rework was marketed towards players who have either never played CVs or even this game before it isn't hard to conclude that the latter is true.

 

Lines: if you plot a development of certain key indicators over time you end up with a line. Or multiple. Especially useful in an unstable / learning environment.

 

Assuming all mechanics are used it it’s full potential: questionable approach. You see a lot of times that users use the product NOT exactly how you envisioned it. 

 

Top players benchmark: yes and no. You certainly want to look at the strongest group to understand the potential of a ship or class. That’s what WG is trying. What is less interesting is if a single player or very few overperform. This can have a million reasons - eg they don’t do anything else all day. Whatever. 

[El2aZeR]

17 minutes ago, 1MajorKoenig said:

Lines: if you plot a development of certain key indicators over time you end up with a line. Or multiple. Especially useful in an unstable / learning environment.

 

Ah, so you meant a graph.

Plotting average graphs doesn't exactly work like that in relation with how WG calculates match influence.

 

17 minutes ago, 1MajorKoenig said:

Assuming all mechanics are used it it’s full potential: questionable approach. You see a lot of times that users use the product NOT exactly how you envisioned it. 

 

Yup, which is why live testing is inevitably needed at some point.

And when that happens you need to decide whether it is an exploit that needs to be fixed or it is working as intended.

 

Basic example was stutter stepping around Lurker shots in SC. The devs never imagined that was possible, but they kept it because it added depth and skill to the gameplay.

Or just take the slingshot mechanic.

 

17 minutes ago, 1MajorKoenig said:

What is less interesting is if a single player or very few overperform. This can have a million reasons - eg they don’t do anything else all day. Whatever.

 

You do realize you're contradicting yourself heavily here?

Assuming they don't do anything else all day, wouldn't that mean this is simply the highest possible potential and is as such relevant?

 

Statistical anomalies can be dismissed because they're inconsistent. If multiple players can consistently perform at a high level that is not a statistical anomaly anymore.

[mtm78]

1 hour ago, veslingr said:

Ah I am not that pessimistic. Many will like subs. And crying on forum is nothing new. If forum is indicator when game will die it is dead from introducing of RPF skill  )

 

Nah I think it died before release tbh

13 minutes ago, 1MajorKoenig said:

What is less interesting is if a single player or very few overperform. This can have a million reasons - eg they don’t do anything else all day. Whatever. 

The interesting is the 'why'. Your 'whatever', well for me that applies to bad players needing a game to be dumbed down constantly because they lack the effort needed to learn a few simple game mechanics and tactics. 

 

This game was better a couple of years back, and now with the threat of submarines it will become totally toxic due to all the baddies having gotten their way.

[veslingr]

1 hour ago, MadBadDave said:

Not even if cv focussed on 1 of the 3 and then another, with only the fear of losing worthless and easily replaced planes, if 3 ships are together they also represent an easier torp target (miss one get another), oh It is up to the cv, there is only so much wasd you can do, how do you angle to avoid damage when facing a plane ?.  I’ve played less than a dozen randoms and I’m already winning the game for my team, from the safety of afar.   How many good DD’s have died going after a cv, and yet they are the smallest, fastest and most manoeuvre-able ship type in the game, e.g when I’m in a dd I can avoid shots from multiple ships but I cannot avoid one attack from a carrier. 

 

The ship I sank to win the game had zero counter play it was my choice to target him, and target him I did until he was sunk, now if I was in another ship class I’d have taken damage and thought about continuing or withdrawing, in a cv you ask yourself what planes do I send next, torps or bombs, seconds later having taken off more hp you ask yourself the same question.

 

How is that not op ?.

 

You do however raise a good point about a sub citadelling a bb, especially given where the citadel sits, should be interesting, how many patches will it take to resolve that one ?

the thing is that although he will probably do one drop and do some dmg (which is ok) he will lose full squad...and no reserves are not limmitles, and no you can not attack with one plane type whole game. And you will be totally useless stacking formation of ship, you will be depleted in first 4 minutes...we see those kind of Cv players on daily bases..been in top 3 place on on scorebord - from behind.

 

also you have 724 PR in CV. and 36% WR (in CV) in last 250 (11 in CVs) games .so pls....pls psl....stop it

 

if anything you are living proof how CV are nothing special in hands of player with lesser skill...you have 0 influnece over outcome of game....infact with 36% you probably alctivly working against your team....and it problably goes from this attitude "i will rush into full defended formation, i have endless plane, i will hit something" - it leads to 36% WR mate.

 

also your highest CV is T6 where AAA is mrginal.

 

i am not harsh towards you, but this is the truth.

[1MajorKoenig]

15 minutes ago, El2aZeR said:

If multiple players can consistently perform at a high level that is not a statistical anomaly anymore.

 

That is exactly the point. Currently you are saying there are not even 100 decent CV players (see about contradicting one self) which is a pretty low number. Are these already significant? Assuming these 100 are indeed playing really always to the full potential? Also - how does that compare to other classes? 

 

17 minutes ago, mtm78 said:

 

Nah I think it died before release tbh

The interesting is the 'why'. Your 'whatever', well for me that applies to bad players needing a game to be dumbed down constantly because they lack the effort needed to learn a few simple game mechanics and tactics. 

 

This game was better a couple of years back, and now with the threat of submarines it will become totally toxic due to all the baddies having gotten their way.

 

I am not arguing whether the game is better now. In fact I think there have been a lot of bad additions and changes to the game.

 

And I am not in favor of dumbing down the game. However if concepts fail to reach a certain attractiveness they need to be reviewed 

[El2aZeR]

5 minutes ago, 1MajorKoenig said:

That is exactly the point. Currently you are saying there are not even 100 decent CV players (see about contradicting one self) which is a pretty low number. Are these already significant? Assuming these 100 are indeed playing really always to the full potential? Also - how does that compare to other classes?

 

And you honestly believe the amount matters? Really?

Perhaps I should rephrase. What matters is consistency. At that point even just a single player is enough. If an outlier consistently shows up, that is not a dismissable coincidence anymore.

 

Other classes have no issues with filling their top 100 with skilled players obviously. Sheer numbers alone will practically assure that.

[Mr_Glitter]

8 minutes ago, veslingr said:

the thing is that although he will probably do one drop and do some dmg (which is ok) he will lose full squad

Pre drop to shorten plane losses. 

8 minutes ago, veslingr said:

and no you can not attack with one plane type whole game.

You have three plane types which can be used for any target. And if you want it you can use one type nearly the whole battle. Reserve management and target choice is the key. 

9 minutes ago, veslingr said:

And you will be totally useless stacking formation of ship, you will be depleted in first 4 minutes...

Pre drop. Slingshot drop. 

Use it. 

10 minutes ago, veslingr said:

we see those kind of Cv players on daily bases..been in top 3 place on on scorebord - from behind.

These players collect Flak bubbles like coins in Mario World. 

Good players take care of their reserves and are able to hit any target at will. 

13 minutes ago, veslingr said:

also you have 724 PR in CV..so pls....pls psl....stop it

You got 332 battles with that acc. What's your point here? 

[veslingr]

Just now, Mr_CVed said:

Pre drop to shorten plane losses. 

You have three plane types which can be used for any target. And if you want it you can use one type nearly the whole battle. Reserve management and target choice is the key. 

Pre drop. Slingshot drop. 

Use it. 

These players collect Flak bubbles like coins in Mario World. 

Good players take care of their reserves and are able to hit any target at will. 

You got 332 battles with that acc. What's your point here? 

Predrop is good thing...but in attacking formation you will fast loose rest of planes (especial if it is 3x3 formation) that you will not do even 1 full drop

Slingshot is good, works for bombers, ussualy on statonary target, to be honest i did not see good use of slingshot in months, and if somebody slingshots me to dheath he outplayed me bad and kudos to him, i do not object to that. Same if somebody outplayed me with good use of islands.

 

i am advocat that good player should be abble to attack any target at will, but with conservative plan usage (predrosps) i can live with incoming dmg (not counting some ludicrous RNG with AP bombers)

 

Yes i have 332 battles with this account, and do not have game in over 6 months...whats is your question behind it, it eludes me?

[Allied_Winter]

6 minutes ago, El2aZeR said:

At that point even just a single player is enough.

Here's the thing though: That is the threshold for you. But not necessarily for WG.

 

Think about it. Let's say you have an unintended (by the Devs) side effect of a game mechanic (exploit) that can be used by everybody yet only a very small number of players (let's say ... 200) are able to make use of that exploit and as a result win 80% of their games.

 

For the rest of the playerbase however the main effects of above mentioned game mechanic are an improvement over some previous game mechanic.

 

Now what do you do? Take a look at how often the average player meets one of the 200. Let's say it's one in 50 games. And let's also assume that the average player is equally often team member and enemy of one of the 200. That makes it one in 100 games where the average player has an exploiting player as enemy. The question now is? Has the average player less fun compared to games where he doesn't meet one of the 200? Debatable as a player could be having no fun as long as he's getting stomped (which happens regardless of an "exploiter" in the enemy team") or simply doesn't care what the team around him does. So you'd have to find basically these players that are annoyed on losing to an enemy solely because the enemy was using an exploit. Which is like searching for a needle in a haystack.

 

All that while having a gamestate that is ... more acceptable for the average player.

 

 

So in the end, you'd be making a decision to invest - yet again - time and money to improve a situation for a fraction of a playerbase (those that are annoyed on losing to an enemy solely because of said exploit) while at the same time risking to create a game state that is less acceptable for the average player.


As so often it has been the case, I can see why WG is reluctant to change anything about the current situation and indeed deems the rework mostly finished.

[Yedwy]

13 hours ago, 1MajorKoenig said:

Even if that would be true - what is WG doing different on cruisers and destroyers? Or aren’t they equally bad balanced in your opinion?

You joking? Haragumo? Stalingrad? Benham? Smolensk?

 

In surface class vs surface class you can angle the damage away, you can use stealth, you ACTIVELY determine and execute the countermeasure and that countermeasure usually negates most or all of the damage, hence "Average Joe" based damage/defense relation when upped still remains similar as in a good player attacked by a good player will defend against it, here you have an automated defense system that in "spreadsheets" has to be beaten by an "Average Joe" to a certain level of damage they desire, however when you are attacked by the good player there is no option for you to really up the defense as its fully automated, the manual interventions (sectors) and skills seem to have little impact statistically... The only way to [edited] up the CVs life is to huddle up and even that basically only works T8 and upwards where ships have some real AA on them, and even then you wont stop him striking you if he really wants, I just pasted a Benham in the middle of a blob, I lost planes but he died, I got new planes later, they didnt get a new Benham... The problem is slingshot is an exploit that negates pretty much all AA and those that master it are basically beyond balance...

[veslingr]

5 minutes ago, Allied_Winter said:

Here's the thing though: That is the threshold for you. But not necessarily for WG.

 

Think about it. Let's say you have an unintended (by the Devs) side effect of a game mechanic (exploit) that can be used by everybody yet only a very small number of players (let's say ... 200) are able to make use of that exploit and as a result win 80% of their games.

 

For the rest of the playerbase however the main effects of above mentioned game mechanic are an improvement over some previous game mechanic.

 

Now what do you do? Take a look at how often the average player meets one of the 200. Let's say it's one in 50 games. And let's also assume that the average player is equally often team member and enemy of one of the 200. That makes it one in 100 games where the average player has an exploiting player as enemy. The question now is? Has the average player less fun compared to games where he doesn't meet one of the 200? Debatable as a player could be having no fun as long as he's getting stomped (which happens regardless of an "exploiter" in the enemy team") or simply doesn't care what the team around him does. So you'd have to find basically these players that are annoyed on losing to an enemy solely because the enemy was using an exploit. Which is like searching for a needle in a haystack.

 

All that while having a gamestate that is ... more acceptable for the average player.

 

 

So in the end, you'd be making a decision to invest - yet again - time and money to improve a situation for a fraction of a playerbase (those that are annoyed on losing to an enemy solely because of said exploit) while at the same time risking to create a game state that is less acceptable for the average player.


As so often it has been the case, I can see why WG is reluctant to change anything about the current situation and indeed deems the rework mostly finished.

this game, as most games are turning around average player because in normal Gauss distribution they are the majority, majority of income, majority of player base.....and offcourse you mold your game according to that majority.

 

it is nothing new to concept of popular games, and it is only long run profitable business module. Will you lose uniqums and exceptionaly bad players..probably...wil it hirt the game...no....long the majority in happy you have yourself a deal.

[Mr_Glitter]

3 minutes ago, veslingr said:

Predrop is good thing...but in attacking formation you will fast loose rest of planes (especial if it is 3x3 formation) that you will not do even 1 full drop

No. You will not lose the rest of your planes. My experience is that the continous AA DPS (including o button) will kill 1 plane before I drop my ordnance. Especially with Saipan pre drop is important. 

8 minutes ago, veslingr said:

Slingshot is good, works for bombers, ussualy on statonary target, to be honest i did not see good use of slingshot in months, and if somebody slingshots me to dheath he outplayed me bad and kudos to him, i do not object to that.

 

8 minutes ago, veslingr said:

Yes i have 332 battles with this account, and do not have game in over 6 months...

So you didn't play the game the last 6 months? So where did you get your experience to discuss the current cv gameplay iteration? 

[Allied_Winter]

4 minutes ago, veslingr said:

and offcourse you mold your game according to that majority.

True. Only when exploits (or simply skilled players that put more effort into learning the game) get too far ahead or when bad players get too far behind you need to change something.

 

And the question is: How far ahead is El2 and the other CV unicums? If WG deems that they are indeed not too far ahead, then the overall game state can be deemed ... balanced. Regardless how often unicums say the mechanic is broken (which it is). But as soon as WG deems that now they are too far ahead, something will change.

[veslingr]

3 minutes ago, Mr_CVed said:

No. You will not lose the rest of your planes. My experience is that the continous AA DPS (including o button) will kill 1 plane before I drop my ordnance. Especially with Saipan pre drop is important. 

 

So you didn't play the game the last 6 months? So where did you get your experience to discuss the current cv gameplay iteration? 

i am just lazy to switch to playing account.

proper usage of sling is so rare that (and to be honest i think of it as exploit not wanted mechanic) that it does not change global thing, where proper usage of sling is almost nonexistant.....and Continous AAA from 3 ships will melt your Saipan 6 planes after one drop....and i need to take some dmg....i am agains no flying zones.