CV Rework Discussion

[CptBarney]

10 minutes ago, FerrowTheFox said:

 

Let's just start our own historical warship game...with blackjack and hookers! balanced CVs and a bloody dismount all flags button!

Yeah and we can use the azur lane grills as deh captains, sure peeps wont mind the elegant lasses having control of the ship.

 

also found out that wargaming has control over the fractured space ip.

 

russian kraken when?

[_CR0ME_]

Has the game become playable or is the rework still something unpleasant? 

[Shadeshots]

Nope game is a mess ,always will be a mess.

[DeviousDave02]

3 hours ago, CptBarney said:

also found out that wargaming has control over the fractured space ip.

And the ultimate irony of that is that Edge Case Games (the company behind Fractured Space), the ones WeeGee bought, went under for DOING THE EXACT THING WARGAMING IS DOING NOW and IGNORING player base concerns and feedback due to 'spreadsheet' saying otherwise. (seriously, there were dissertation length posts wrote by players in a desperate attempt to curtail the apocalyptic f**k ups the devs were making)

 

It's like watching history (beeping) repeat itself.

 

edit: I miss my Watchman...

[El2aZeR]

"Cossack is a great choice against CVs!"

Spoiler

 

"CV - DD interaction is fine." lol

[CptBarney]

3 hours ago, DeviousDave02 said:

And the ultimate irony of that is that Edge Case Games (the company behind Fractured Space), the ones WeeGee bought, went under for DOING THE EXACT THING WARGAMING IS DOING NOW and IGNORING player base concerns and feedback due to 'spreadsheet' saying otherwise. (seriously, there were dissertation length posts wrote by players in a desperate attempt to curtail the apocalyptic f**k ups the devs were making)

 

It's like watching history (beeping) repeat itself.

 

edit: I miss my Watchman...

Ahh so thats why it died, i assumed it was because of the game just simply being unpopular in general.

 

Thats actually kind of annoying since fractured space would probs still be alive by now.

[Rionnen_marksman]

3 hours ago, CptBarney said:

Ahh so thats why it died, i assumed it was because of the game just simply being unpopular in general.

 

Thats actually kind of annoying since fractured space would probs still be alive by now.

To be fair to WG, that is a traditional path that the majority (certainly not all) online games go down, I have played countless games where the creators have not listened and as a result, the game has died (or population decreased to a level where it may aswell have)

[FerrowTheFox]

Vor 9 Stunden, DeviousDave02 sagte:

And the ultimate irony of that is that Edge Case Games (the company behind Fractured Space), the ones WeeGee bought, went under for DOING THE EXACT THING WARGAMING IS DOING NOW and IGNORING player base concerns and feedback due to 'spreadsheet' saying otherwise. (seriously, there were dissertation length posts wrote by players in a desperate attempt to curtail the apocalyptic f**k ups the devs were making)

 

It's like watching history (beeping) repeat itself.

 

edit: I miss my Watchman... 

Yes, it's pretty funny how simmilar the issues were. I still remember when they completely re(eee)worked the snipers into the ground, shrank all maps and reduced respawn cooldown to "get players back into action faster and avoid boring downtimes" because "that's what players want".

The players (me included) wrote pages upon pages and explained we played this game BECAUSE it was slower paced and tactical as opposed to just pew-pewing.

 

They also tried to dumb down the game by having the point defense systems fire automatically at incoming missiles as opposed to the former manual activation you had to do when you heard the incoming fire alert because the stats showed "many players didn't press the button and took unneccessary damage".

It took a complete community meltdown for them to have both automatic (lower damage) AA for beginners and manual (normal damage) for those who could manage to hit a god damn button...

 

I guess WG looked at these guys and said "wow look, they'd fit right into our work ethic! let's buy their studio!"

[TohtoriP]

I find it funny that a Musashi that should be "balanced" because bad AA can actually cope with carriers much much better than a Fletcher. If Musashi had no AA at all it would still be way better as it can tank so much damage and thus take the carriers attention away from other ships for a long time. In meanwhile properly played tier 6 rocket planes do regularly 3k salvos breaking modules on tier 8 DDs forcing them to damage con, smoke and "dodge" thus shutting them down for long periods. What is the point?

[CptBarney]

2 hours ago, FerrowTheFox said:

Yes, it's pretty funny how simmilar the issues were. I still remember when they completely re(eee)worked the snipers into the ground, shrank all maps and reduced respawn cooldown to "get players back into action faster and avoid boring downtimes" because "that's what players want".

The players (me included) wrote pages upon pages and explained we played this game BECAUSE it was slower paced and tactical as opposed to just pew-pewing.

 

They also tried to dumb down the game by having the point defense systems fire automatically at incoming missiles as opposed to the former manual activation you had to do when you heard the incoming fire alert because the stats showed "many players didn't press the button and took unneccessary damage".

It took a complete community meltdown for them to have both automatic (lower damage) AA for beginners and manual (normal damage) for those who could manage to hit a god damn button...

 

I guess WG looked at these guys and said "wow look, they'd fit right into our work ethic! let's buy their studio!"

Ahh that reminds me of why the maps were smoll when i came back, which actually made it awkward because you got no break. I actually like the manual stuff because i can actually engage my brain while playing (god forbid the average person does this, humanity could be a semi-peaceful species colonising half of the galaxy by now).

 

Explains why my protector kept firing its AMS's automatically, confusing me when i got back.

 

It reminds of armoured warfare in a way, and they wonder why their games are dead.

 

Dreadnoughts i thought would be similar, but its just the same dumbed down stuff sadly.

[FerrowTheFox]

Vor 2 Minuten, CptBarney sagte:

Ahh that reminds me of why the maps were smoll when i came back, which actually made it awkward because you got no break. I actually like the manual stuff because i can actually engage my brain while playing (god forbid the average person does this, humanity could be a semi-peaceful species colonising half of the galaxy by now).

Yes exactly! With the smol lanes and short respawn it didn't even matter if you killed a key ship, because he'd be back in a couple of seconds. "Let's kill the support vessel, focus fire! Ok, he's dead, now kill their DDs! *support vessel already back, heals DDs*"

No breathing room to make a strategic move. Naturally many battles just devolved into a stalemate brawl around key locations until one team made a mistake and lost all ships at once during gamma battle, then it was roflstomp time.

 

Exactly, I WANT to think and strategize when I play a PvP game. And the whole thing why manual PDS was awesome was that you tried to overwhelm the enemy captain by forcing him to maneuver and protect his ship's broken armor. Then when he was distracted you could push in some missiles and he wouldn't be able to react in time. With auto PDS the only chance was to saturate it with many missile attacks at once.

[BLUB__BLUB]

42 minutes ago, TohtoriP said:

In meanwhile properly played tier 6 rocket planes do regularly 3k salvos breaking modules on tier 8 DDs forcing them to damage con

This is not really true.... 

I just had a game all rockets hit, on a cruiser, giving me 3K. FACTCHECK:

- Usually on a DD even if i he is sitting stationary broadside, some rockets miss;

- if modules get hit, these give no damage. 

 

Therefore... 3K salvo regularly... nope.

[CptBarney]

7 minutes ago, FerrowTheFox said:

Yes exactly! With the smol lanes and short respawn it didn't even matter if you killed a key ship, because he'd be back in a couple of seconds. "Let's kill the support vessel, focus fire! Ok, he's dead, now kill their DDs! *support vessel already back, heals DDs*"

No breathing room to make a strategic move. Naturally many battles just devolved into a stalemate brawl around key locations until one team made a mistake and lost all ships at once during gamma battle, then it was roflstomp time.

 

Exactly, I WANT to think and strategize when I play a PvP game. And the whole thing why manual PDS was awesome was that you tried to overwhelm the enemy captain by forcing him to maneuver and protect his ship's broken armor. Then when he was distracted you could push in some missiles and he wouldn't be able to react in time. With auto PDS the only chance was to saturate it with many missile attacks at once.

The thing is csgo does a very good example of how to make a fast intense game, but with the ability to make decent strategies and also pre-planning plus tactics, the maps maybe smoll, but that suits the game just fine as you can still win even if you can't just headshot every person you see, plus no respawns barring special game modes.

 

I never liked the gamma thing, it just felt very forced, go here very few mins to get some stat boost that lets you push up a bit or a lot and then idk do the same again unless you win.

 

It's like warthunder maps are toineh as fook and dd's get shat on by light and heavy cruisers before they can do sod all.

[FerrowTheFox]

To get back to topic: Interestingly, remembering this I actually suggested something along these lines in regard to the CV AA problem. Have AA fire automatically as it is now, but have players be able to take manual control of the AA mounts to direct some non RNG damage at the planes at the expense of being able to fire their main guns at the same time. Thus people would actually get a chance to defend themselves.

 

And yes, it has been pointed out that this would put more strain on DDs and as a DD main I agree, us smol ships have our hands full most of the time already. However on the other hand many DDs and CLs carried dual purpose guns that could get the ability to fire a 3rd shell type at aircraft and thus make them the fleet escorts they were meant to be. Just some ideas.

[DeviousDave02]

The best part of the entire Fractured Space fiasco was that Fractured Space was the whole reason I started playing World of Warships.

 

Back when the devs re-introduced the Paragon (Fractured Spaces only carrier) after reworking it, there were tons of people pointing out it was still kinda meh (you had 1 fighter squadron, that struggled to intercept anything not aimed directly at you, 1 bomber squadron, that struggled to hit the broadside of a 4 kilometer battleship, and 1 drone squadron, that was actually really useful)  and they should have used WOW's Carrier system instead as it was really, really good.

 

As such I downloaded WoW to see for myself (and got hooked)

 

Then Wargaming changed it (facepalm)

[DeviousDave02]

7 minutes ago, FerrowTheFox said:

To get back to topic: Interestingly, remembering this I actually suggested something along these lines in regard to the CV AA problem. Have AA fire automatically as it is now, but have players be able to take manual control of the AA mounts to direct some non RNG damage at the planes at the expense of being able to fire their main guns at the same time. Thus people would actually get a chance to defend themselves.

 

And yes, it has been pointed out that this would put more strain on DDs and as a DD main I agree, us smol ships have our hands full most of the time already. However on the other hand many DDs and CLs carried dual purpose guns that could get the ability to fire a 3rd shell type at aircraft and thus make them the fleet escorts they were meant to be. Just some ideas.

 See, this could work as DD's aren't always in the thick of combat. So when your on your own or with allied ships and 'safe' from hostile surface ships you switch to AA mode to have a better chance to intercept the CV's planes. Then, while fighting surface targets, you switch back to surface engagement mode and rely on auto AA to ward of or slightly irritate the CV's planes.

 

This would make early game DD hunting far more dangerous for the CV as the ability to manually blap your planes would act as a deterrent to chase them. It would also allow DD's to act as escorts for larger surface ships to provide heavier AA cover.

[FerrowTheFox]

Gerade eben, DeviousDave02 sagte:

See, this could work as DD's aren't always in the thick of combat. So when your on your own or with allied ships and 'safe' from hostile surface ships you switch to AA mode to have a better chance to intercept the CV's planes. Then, while fighting surface targets, you switch back to surface engagement mode and rely on auto AA to ward of or slightly irritate the CV's planes.

 

This would make early game DD hunting far more dangerous for the CV as the ability to manually blap your planes would act as a deterrent to chase them. It would also allow DD's to act as escorts for larger surface ships to provide heavier AA cover.

Exactly! The most important thing to make sure would be to not give "air burst" rounds the ability to damage surface ships significantly, though, so switching is a must. Also, it needs to be balanced. I mean I want the CV to also be able to strike and not get totally shredded the moment a DD is near. But I think it would only take for him to work together with a friendly DD or CA. One of them distracts DD and the other attacks him. So the DD could either shoot down planes and get blapped by surface fire or engage surface ship and get bombed by planes. Maybe CV alpha needs to be buffed as well... Input from CV player necessary here.

 

Maybe this could also counteract the stereotypical Shima lone wolf to some degree as sticking a bit closer to your big guns to give THEM more AA cover would be viable?

 

However, all that being said I still agree that especially with upcoming ASW duty for DDs, maybe being AA escorts is just asking a bit too much. I mean then a DDs discription would be "protecc fleet against EVERYTHING"

But maybe dual purpose AAing could also be the gimmick for CLs and destroyer leaders and actually make them very useful that way?

[MrBourpif]

Ok, i admit it's a bit OP, when playing primetime with complete noobs. 

 

[Puffin_]

Enterprise is not op. I lost 

[CptBarney]

36 minutes ago, Puffin_ said:

Enterprise is not op. I lost 

Yeah you will get teams that try their hardest at throwing the game, and its even worse when the enemy team is pretty gud too.

 

dont think i’ve gotten over 3 kills yet in midway.

[LowSpeedHighDrag]

"Spotting have killed the game"

 

Dropped Fighters (CAP) on map

Option A:  Their spotting ability is active as long as they are patrolling in their dropped areas.

Option B:  Their spotting ability is only active for a limited period, after being dropped. But their Combat Air Patrol area is still active.

Option C:  Their spotting radius is decided upon how many fighters are patrolling the area (i.e. 4 planes maximum spotting distance, 1 plane minimum spotting distance from centre of axis)

Option D:  If they are all dead, no spotting. No pew pew from air to air.

 

 

Flying player controlled planes

When a player is actively controlling the squadron.  The fog of war will be lifted off the minimap.  As the flying squadron is moving from grid to grid/area to area.  

Also the squadrons spotting is limited to X amount of distance from the centre point of axis.  So the squadrons will have to actively seek to find a target, loiter the target area to receive spotting damage (this should be boosted & reflected to CV players, not just relying on damage alone when calculating the credit earning formula).  If the squadron all gets shot down.  There will be a countdown of X amount of seconds until that area goes dark, effectively fog of war reactivating.  Or until another squadron flies into the unmasked zone.

 

Summary

The battle space is no longer open "spotted" for the whole duration. 

It would give all the ships the option to maneuver freely (provided they are not being actively spotted).  

It would also limit the CV's purpose to farm just for their own needs (opposite of team play).

 

 

Wargaming, can we test this idea at least?

 

@Sub_Octavian,  @Flambass

 

 

 

 

[El2aZeR]

1 hour ago, Puffin_ said:

Enterprise is not op. I lost 

 

 

Just get a few more kills. It's not that hard. 

 

[MrBourpif]

Only way to be sure is to kill all. 

 

Once on WoT I killed all ennemy team, but 1 .. Guy stealcap base 

 

 

[El2aZeR]

3 minutes ago, MrBourpif said:

Once on WoT I killed all ennemy team, but 1 .. Guy stealcap base 

 

Well thankfully that can't happen to you with reworked CVs since your response time is pretty much instant, meaning you can deny a cap pretty much indefinitely.

So there's that.

[Sir_Foxworth]

9 hours ago, TohtoriP said:

I find it funny that a Musashi that should be "balanced" because bad AA can actually cope with carriers much much better than a Fletcher. If Musashi had no AA at all it would still be way better as it can tank so much damage and thus take the carriers attention away from other ships for a long time. In meanwhile properly played tier 6 rocket planes do regularly 3k salvos breaking modules on tier 8 DDs forcing them to damage con, smoke and "dodge" thus shutting them down for long periods. What is the point?

i just had one of these days where cvs ruined my dd gameplay all day long. Doesn't happen allways but today, even the worst players (i checked stats) had that luck to find me instantly, hit me multiple times and after the first attackrun i was at half to low HP, nice start in the battle.