CV Rework Discussion

[Darth_Glorious]

Jap 25 mm guns are now included in short range AA while US 28 mm guns still are mid range AA

US 76.2 mm guns (on Worcester and Des Moines) are now mid range AA

[Nechrom]

4 hours ago, ghostbuster_ said:

its so EDIT boring

Sure, but I don't see how you can get away from it being "boring" while keeping it accessible.

 

They want to give CVs similar impact as other ship classes, so they can't have this amazing tool belt of utility which might be fun to play with, but completely imbalanced.

Even if they add lots of details to fiddle around with when you play around doing strikes and scouting, it's going to move more towards that old prohibitive learning curve.

 

It's like if you remove the sailing and positioning aspect of the other classes. That would also be pretty boring.

A CV player barely has to think about defense, so if you created enough gameplay to occupy him, it would be way too much offensive actions for one ship.

 

I don't really have the solution, short of just tuning strike damage way down while presenting lots of strike opportunities.

I doubt that the revamped AA can be tuned well enough so that there's a significant difference in AA effectiveness between a good and a bad player while still keeping strike effectiveness relatively normalized. Ideally a bad CV player versus a bad target player should yield the same results as a good CV player versus a good target player.

 

3 hours ago, Darth_Glorious said:

Jap 25 mm guns are now included in short range AA while US 28 mm guns still are mid range AA

[Gvozdika]

I think how they tune the AA will be key to the rework. From personal experiences and from various videos of others the current abilities of surface ships to defend themselves is pretty lacklustre. The only exceptions are fast small ships which can dodge their way out of an attack run.

 

I think they should either:

 

a) Dial back the damage-dealing potential of a squadron (less strike damage or fewer attack runs per squadron). 

 

B) Remove the unlimited planes - make losses of aircraft have a REAL impact. Make the preservation of planes benefit careful players and hinder careless ones over the course of a longer game - plus it means that shooting down incoming air strikes has some more meaning/Value.

 

C) Improve the AA abilities of surface ship players. Give them some more input than simply left/right sector / pray for RNG to be kind. The switching of fire to one side or the other takes a loooong time (can be reduced a bit by swinging the ship around and trying to see the 'hot' side facing towards the planes) - but even then it didn't seem to make the slightest bit of difference to the guy attacking me.

 

As it is now in the current test, the 'experience' isn't particularly challenging for a CV player, they can't really support their team beyond the process of damage farming. Those on the receiving end have limited means to counteract a CV player and so their gameplay experience is pretty dire. Not ideal whichever side of the fence you sit. 

 

Still, it is a test - so I want to see how things change with the next few iterations.

 

 

 

 

 

[DrMechano]

I think Ships based AA definitely needs to be buffed, from what I've been told even AA focused builds on cruisers with the Defensive Fire up deals barely any damage to attacking aircraft. I'd also say ditch the whole 'side select' thing, it really doesn't make sense, ships always had enough manpower to crew all their AA guns in a pinch. Infact I'd suggest having the option between 'Normal' and 'AA' focused, increasing the reload of your main and secondary guns but much improving your AA firepower on BBs with the use of the O key (Star Trek Online had this where you could focus power to shields, weapons or engines, keeping them balanced OR pushing one area higher to be able to tank, deal more damage, or move faster).

[Nechrom]

16 minutes ago, Gvozdika said:

B) Remove the unlimited planes - make losses of aircraft have a REAL impact. Make the preservation of planes benefit careful players and hinder careless ones over the course of a longer game - plus it means that shooting down incoming air strikes has some more meaning/Value.

The reason why limited planes is on the chopping block for the revamp is that it's a really bad balancing mechanic.

1. It only ever becomes a thing after a certain point/time spent.

2. The ships getting hit don't really care. They need the planes to go away before they can make an effective drop.

3. It's a big part of the issue when there is a skill gap between opposing CV players. The worse player don't just perform worse, they also get completely shut down as time goes on.

4. No matter how bad you are, being left without planes is dumb. You can say that other ships just sink instead, but at least then you can hop into another battle and don't need to first rush the enemy with your empty CV (which on top of wasting your time, loses your team points).

[Pikkozoikum]

1 hour ago, ghostbuster_ said:

yeah, true its a team game where you cant help your other ships with new cvs... great design.

You can help you team mates in the way like every ship helps the team mates

 

-Fighter support

-Defending a cap

-Finishing low HP targets (that maybe would escape)

-Spotting

-DD crippling, so mates could finish them

-and maybe more

 

Other ship types have way less opportunities to help the team..... what can a BB do? Fire support... What can a cruiser do? Fire and aa support... (sometimes radar) and a dd? Cap and spotting.

The CV can do almost every support type of the game. But in a bit weaker or different way, then the specialized ship type. And thats okay, why should be the CV again a ship, that can do everything at it's best? We have it now, and it's unfair to other ship types

[Darth_Glorious]

AA puffs can overpen planes

[ghostbuster_]

2 hours ago, Nechrom said:

Sure, but I don't see how you can get away from it being "boring" while keeping it accessible.

 

They want to give CVs similar impact as other ship classes, so they can't have this amazing tool belt of utility which might be fun to play with, but completely imbalanced.

Even if they add lots of details to fiddle around with when you play around doing strikes and scouting, it's going to move more towards that old prohibitive learning curve.

 

It's like if you remove the sailing and positioning aspect of the other classes. That would also be pretty boring.

A CV player barely has to think about defense, so if you created enough gameplay to occupy him, it would be way too much offensive actions for one ship.

 

I don't really have the solution, short of just tuning strike damage way down while presenting lots of strike opportunities.

I doubt that the revamped AA can be tuned well enough so that there's a significant difference in AA effectiveness between a good and a bad player while still keeping strike effectiveness relatively normalized. Ideally a bad CV player versus a bad target player should yield the same results as a good CV player versus a good target player.

 

 

again... there are many suggestion made to solve the problems about current cvs. change the spotting mechanic of planes, lower the alpha damage of planes, lower the fire/fload chance... so many things can be done but what wg did (adding gf and a bombs ) is the opposite of solving the problems.  and you are wrong. this rework isnt about giving cvs smilar impact. its about making them playable with console. because rts is impossible to play with console. so those all balancing reasons for this rework WG gave us is just bulls.ht. they are just fairytales. do you really think that adding ap bombs was a move to balance nope. saipan? nope. enterprise? nope. 

 

ofc cv has to think about defence... like any other class but in a different way. because the cv itself is not in danger since its always far away from the battle and it getting spotted is much harder than the other ships getting spotted. so cv has to defend somehow. so it should defend its own planes against any other threat incluiding enemy cv. with this new cv gameplay, you dont have to defend your planes against enemy cv because enemy cv can do sh.t about your planes. you dont have to think about defending your planes from surface ships because there is no hangarcapacity. this rework made the cv gameplay as easy as possible. it couldnt be easier than this.  and its just wrong. this game shouldnt be complete r.tardproof. 

 

2 hours ago, Nechrom said:

 

3. It's a big part of the issue when there is a skill gap between opposing CV players. The worse player don't just perform worse, they also get completely shut down as time goes on.

 

well then this worse player has to use his brain and learn from his mistakes. he should learn to pick targets wisely so he dont get deplaned after 5-6 mins into game. this is how it should be. skill should matter somehow. 

[Pikkozoikum]

9 minutes ago, Darth_Glorious said:

AA puffs can overpen planes

is that not the short range aa? Short range does small amounts of damage.

But I also observed, that I did sometimes above 500 damage with Fuso, but I'm sure, it wasn't the long range. So wondering if there is a critical hit chance

[Darth_Glorious]

2 minutes ago, Pikkozoikum said:

is that not the short range aa? Short range does small amounts of damage.

But I also observed, that I did sometimes above 500 damage with Fuso, but I'm sure, it wasn't the long range. So wondering if there is a critical hit chance

They don't display short range AA dmg because it is per tick

75 is 10% of 750 dmg (which is the max damage of mid and longe range AA puffs for Worcester)

[ghostbuster_]

2 hours ago, Pikkozoikum said:

You can help you team mates in the way like every ship helps the team mates

 

-Fighter support

-Defending a cap

-Finishing low HP targets (that maybe would escape)

-Spotting

-DD crippling, so mates could finish them

-and maybe more

 

Other ship types have way less opportunities to help the team..... what can a BB do? Fire support... What can a cruiser do? Fire and aa support... (sometimes radar) and a dd? Cap and spotting.

The CV can do almost every support type of the game. But in a bit weaker or different way, then the specialized ship type. And thats okay, why should be the CV again a ship, that can do everything at it's best? We have it now, and it's unfair to other ship types

what can a bb do? fire support, tanking, spotting, capping(contesting)

a ca? fire support, hydro support, radar, def AA, spotting, capping, with some cas also tanking

a dd? fire support, spotting, capping, smoke support and with some def AA and hydro support.

what can a cv do with this new gameplay? fire support . 

 

on the other hand. iif there is a dd harrasing your teammates, what can you do with your dd to help them? you can spot him, shoot at him, torp him, smoke your allies. there is a possibilty you outplaying enemy dd and eliminating the threat. 

you can also outplay a ca in your ca. same goes for bbs. but with new cv gameplay, there is NO OUTPLAYING ENEMY CV BECAUSE YOU CANT DO EDIT ABOUT IT. this new gameplay focuses cvs on damage dealing only, nothing else. you dont have to worry about enemy cv or AA of other ships since you have unlimited amount of planes. yeah . perfect teamplay perfect skill requirement right EDIT there.

[Pikkozoikum]

7 minutes ago, ghostbuster_ said:

again... there are many suggestion made to solve the problems about current cvs. change the spotting mechanic of planes, lower the alpha damage of planes, lower the fire/fload chance... so many things can be done but what wg did (adding gf and a bombs ) is the opposite of solving the problems.  and you are wrong. this rework isnt about giving cvs smilar impact. its about making them playable with console. because rts is impossible to play with console. so those all balancing reasons for this rework WG gave us is just bulls.ht. they are just fairytales. do you really think that adding ap bombs was a move to balance nope. saipan? nope. enterprise? nope. 

 

ofc cv has to think about defence... like any other class but in a different way. because the cv itself is not in danger since its always far away from the battle and it getting spotted is much harder than the other ships getting spotted. so cv has to defend somehow. so it should defend its own planes against any other threat incluiding enemy cv. with this new cv gameplay, you dont have to defend your planes against enemy cv because enemy cv can do sh.t about your planes. you dont have to think about defending your planes from surface ships because there is no hangarcapacity. this rework made the cv gameplay as easy as possible. it couldnt be easier than this.  and its just wrong. this game shouldnt be complete r.tardproof. 

Yes, I'm wrong... and Wargaming... and all the Youtubers.

1 Squad for spotting instead of 7 is not a smaller impact.

A way lower alpha strike is not a smaller impact.

no instant kill of dds is not a smaller impact...

 

The RTS style will always have too many squads, too many vision. If you lower alpha strike, it will do no damage Also you have to look at the CV vs non-CV combat, which is totally not enagaging. CV does a cross drop and the ship has to avoide that somehow. The new version is way more fair, since the cv can only drop from one side, so you can play with your enhanced AA site, and trying to dodge the the single squad. Once a carrier attacked me for 10 minutes, until he sunk me, because he hit no 10 torp cross drop alpha strike. I was only tryin to dodge. In the live version I would be dead in seconds.

[Nechrom]

8 minutes ago, ghostbuster_ said:

do you really think that adding ap bombs was a move to balance nope. saipan? nope. enterprise? nope. 

And what does that have to do with the rework?

 

6 minutes ago, ghostbuster_ said:

well then this worse player has to use his brain and learn from his mistakes. he should learn to pick targets wisely so he dont get deplaned after 5-6 mins into game. this is how it should be. skill should matter somehow.

Yes, skill should matter. But it shouldn't remove your ability to even attempt to fight.

If you're bad then you should have a difficult time getting anything out of your strike attempts. There is no reason whatsoever that it should result in getting permanently disarmed.

 

WG wants bad players to play the game as well. So they can't just say that those players don't get to participate beyond the first minutes of the battle just because they are bad.

[Pikkozoikum]

3 minutes ago, ghostbuster_ said:

what can a bb do? fire support, tanking, spotting, capping(contesting)

beside tanking that can do a CV as well. (Btw there is no real tanking, bbs don't want die as well)

3 minutes ago, ghostbuster_ said:

a ca? fire support, hydro support, radar, def AA, spotting, capping, with some cas also tanking

Can do a CV as well, except looking through smokes

3 minutes ago, ghostbuster_ said:

a dd? fire support, spotting, capping, smoke support and with some def AA and hydro support.

Can do a CV as well beside smoke support

3 minutes ago, ghostbuster_ said:

what can a cv do with this new gameplay? fire support . 

I wrote it in a post before, you seemed to ignore that.

 

The fighter consuamble is like any other ulitiy consumable smoke / radar / Def AA. A consumalbe to support mates.

 

Also you don't even know, what consumables the CV will get in the finished version.

What if the CV gets smokes and radar planes? Then he can support even more. That has nothing to do with the gameplay.

 

The CV is a mix of a BB, Cruiser and DD, he can do things, that all these ship can do, but not everything.

 

You're arguing against the CV just like people argued about the Asashio, that this ship is an egoist ship.

(Asashio is the best teamplay destroyer in the game)

 

 

 

[ghostbuster_]

Just now, Pikkozoikum said:

Yes, I'm wrong... and Wargaming... and all the Youtubers.

1 Squad for spotting instead of 7 is not a smaller impact.

A way lower alpha strike is not a smaller impact.

no instant kill of dds is not a smaller impact...

 

The RTS style will always have too many squads, too many vision. If you lower alpha strike, it will do no damage Also you have to look at the CV vs non-CV combat, which is totally not enagaging. CV does a cross drop and the ship has to avoide that somehow. The new version is way more fair, since the cv can only drop from one side, so you can play with your enhanced AA site, and trying to dodge the the single squad. Once a carrier attacked me for 10 minutes, until he sunk me, because he hit no 10 torp cross drop alpha strike. I was only tryin to dodge. In the live version I would be dead in seconds.

yeah "al youtubers"... so many f.cking suggestons were made to solve the problems we have with currents cv by youtubers or by many good players. im writing this for 10th time maybe ffs. they showed so many ways how WG could solve those problems. what did WG do? introced ap bombs, gz, enterprise, saipan; they removed manual drops from t4-5 so newbies cant learn the basics early on... so yes, wg is so freaking wrong about this. 

yes, you would be dead in secs if you completely ignored that its a cv game and went all alone. ofc you f.cking die... again again and again. look there are so many possiblities. lower the spotting distance of planes. or make the plane spotting like radar mechanic in cyclone. if you get spotted by plane, only ships within 8 km are gonna be able to see your ship.  lower alpha damage so a drop cant do much damage. lower it so much a cv to need 8 freaking torps to sink your shima.  change fire/fload chances if you want cvs to focus on DoT.  so many solutions. im not saying the current cvs are perfect and there is no problem. no. but this new gameplay is just trash. 

[Pikkozoikum]

13 minutes ago, Darth_Glorious said:

They don't display short range AA dmg because it is per tick

75 is 10% of 750 dmg (which is the max damage of mid and longe range AA puffs for Worcester)

Funny, if this is true. I like complex mechanics

[Pikkozoikum]

2 minutes ago, ghostbuster_ said:

yeah "al youtubers"... so many f.cking suggestons were made to solve the problems we have with currents cv by youtubers or by many good players. im writing this for 10th time maybe ffs. they showed so many ways how WG could solve those problems. what did WG do? introced ap bombs, gz, enterprise, saipan; they removed manual drops from t4-5 so newbies cant learn the basics early on... so yes, wg is so freaking wrong about this. 

yes, you would be dead in secs if you completely ignored that its a cv game and went all alone. ofc you f.cking die... again again and again. look there are so many possiblities. lower the spotting distance of planes. or make the plane spotting like radar mechanic in cyclone. if you get spotted by plane, only ships within 8 km are gonna be able to see your ship.  lower alpha damage so a drop cant do much damage. lower it so much a cv to need 8 freaking torps to sink your shima.  change fire/fload chances if you want cvs to focus on DoT.  so many solutions. im not saying the current cvs are perfect and there is no problem. no. but this new gameplay is just trash. 

There are many possibilities and Wargaming took one. Not everyone will be happy with every possibility. Makes no sense to write alternative possibilities to fix it, because other people won't be happy with that.

The new gameplay is trash -that's your opinion

My opinion - RTS gameplay is trash and unfair

[ghostbuster_]

6 minutes ago, Nechrom said:

And what does that have to do with the rework?

 

Yes, skill should matter. But it shouldn't remove your ability to even attempt to fight.

If you're bad then you should have a difficult time getting anything out of your strike attempts. There is no reason whatsoever that it should result in getting permanently disarmed.

 

WG wants bad players to play the game as well. So they can't just say that those players don't get to participate beyond the first minutes of the battle just because they are bad.

WG said high alpha damage of cvs is a problem but it was them who introduced that very mechanic into the game. so it shows they are telling fairytales to people.

 

then you have to learn. you can be disarmed once or twice. then you have to be able to learn what you were doing wrong. if you cant learn, well  its not the cvs fault. its you being uncapable of learning new things.

i saw many bad cv players who were actually trying to learn. they try to strafe, they try to deny attacks. they fail. but im sure they are gonna learn because they are trying. and then we have other group of bad players who just fly in a straight line getting strafed and whine on forum. everyone was bad once. i couldnt even cross drop dds for some time. its not hard. people has to try only try. 

[ghostbuster_]

2 minutes ago, Pikkozoikum said:

There are many possibilities and Wargaming took one. Not everyone will be happy with every possibility. Makes no sense to write alternative possibilities to fix it, because other people won't be happy with that.

The new gameplay is trash -that's your opinion

My opinion - RTS gameplay is trash and unfair

yes, they took the one which was the worst of all, which required much more work than other solutions and which can make cvs playable in console. so .yeah definitelly the best choice...

fair enough. you have your oppinion and i have mine. end of story. 

btw. you can call it trash. but its not unfair. it requires a bit of skill. 

[ForlornSailor]

2 minutes ago, Pikkozoikum said:

RTS gameplay is trash and unfair

 

This literally does not make sense. Everything, that was/is wrong with CVs has nothing to do with RTS itself. Its a matter of balancing.

[Pikkozoikum]

Just now, ghostbuster_ said:

yes, they took the one which was the worst of all, which required much more work than other solutions and which can make cvs playable in console. so .yeah definitelly the best choice...

fair enough. you have your oppinion and i have mine. end of story.

The worst is the current version...

And why do people think it's for Console? RTS implemantation on console would be easier than making a new gameplay... RTS games exist on Playstation 1, why should be that a problem?

[Darth_Glorious]

Another overpen

 

 

 

[ghostbuster_]

4 minutes ago, Pikkozoikum said:

The worst is the current version...

And why do people think it's for Console? RTS implemantation on console would be easier than making a new gameplay... RTS games exist on Playstation 1, why should be that a problem?

ok it was my own oppinion calling the new gameplay the worst. and you think the current one is the worst. fair enough. but you cant deny it was just dumb to pick the hardert one. they could easly fix the problems without changing an entire class and all aa mechanic and acaptain skills... 

 

ok are you serious right now? have you even tried both gameplays? old and the new? tell me which one can be played in console? 

[Pikkozoikum]

1 minute ago, ForlornSailor said:

 

This literally does not make sense. Everything, that was/is wrong with CVs has nothing to do with RTS itself. Its a matter of balancing.

-Bugged UI

-Unappealing gameplay (Playing on a Map with flying pixels and icons, there is a reason for low CV number and it's not because of a missing tutorial)

-Omnipresence with 5-7 squads (that's not a balancing issue, it's the RTS gameplay having many squads)

-Game mechanics like crossdropping with 3x4 or 2x6 torps (balancing it with damage makes no sense, would make the CV weak)

-Skill gap with a ship type, that has huge impact (RTS is about fighting the other CV to stop him from dropping, while dropping the other enemies. The better player gives the team a major advantage, that no other ship type can do)

 

[1MajorKoenig]

4 minutes ago, ForlornSailor said:

 

This literally does not make sense. Everything, that was/is wrong with CVs has nothing to do with RTS itself. Its a matter of balancing.

 

See and here we agree to disagree.  RTS is in my opinion the wrong model to portray CV battles in WOWS. No matter how much lipstick you put on it. 

 

And yes I normally love good RTS games.