Aircraft Carrier: Changes to Tech Trees, Upgrades and Commander Skills - Discussion Thread

[GravityTrash]

12 hours ago, ResurrectedEagle said:

Oh man this a sad day for WOWS. 

I love the RTS gameplay but I know this game needs this rework badly, so I am ok with it. 

 

Kinda like the new gameplay aswell. 

 

But removing such iconic ships like Hiryu, Taiho and Essex and crippling the whole tech tree 

 

and 

 

the point that you cant control your bloody carrier properly really bothers me. (no one from WG gaves a statement to this so far, even though everyone is pointing it out)

 

I dont think I can support the rework, if this is the still the case when it hits live.

 

I hope they are not out for long i quite like taiho and it would be kinda sad without it... And atleast give more control over the CV but i fear they wont give us that

[AstreTunes]

I play wows as a collection game, therefore I'm very unhappy that you're removing ships...

I wish we could still be able to, at least, admire them in the port, even if we can't play them in any modes (like the submarine in april 2017)

Anyway, the ships that you're going to remove, are quite common waifus, ie. Taiho, Hiryu, Essex, would you please consider the weeb playerbase as well?

[Redcap375]

12 minutes ago, MrConway said:

To explain, when you decide to hand one of the ships back in, you will get all of the XP spent on researching it back as well. If we let you hand back in only the lower tiers, you would have a ship in port that you have effectively not researched yet.

But we have researched it on the old system? or doesn't that count for nothing?

 

why would I wanna keep a sliver tier 8 ship when I have now 3 premium ones now at tier 8? I wanna keep the Haku thank you very much..

[AdmiralCollingwood]

First of all, I would prefer a personal conversation (ts3?) if you have some time, but as it will not happen here some more thoughts.

Quote

Yes, permanent camouflages can be sold for a full doubloon refund. (What about captains retraining for other classes / nations one would have grinded instead. Wouldn`t it be wiser to move the captains xp of carriers to the free captains XP pool - and if you scrap our carriers - cant you give some steel at least ?) Though  it might not be to late to stop it - free after the saying:"You dont have to say B after A, if you saw that A was wrong ?

 

 

They will be removed for the time being and might come back in future - we're not saying that they are gone forever. Limiting the amount of ships on the initial release will hopefully make it easier to properly balance them.  ( MAYBE JUST BALANCE the existing System instead, or even better bathtube mode for all)

 

 

To explain, when you decide to hand one of the ships back in, you will get all of the XP spent on researching it back as well. If we let you hand back in only the lower tiers, you would have a ship in port that you have effectively not researched yet. (Do not forget to implement a warning in game)

 

 

I don't quite understand this point, in the current system there is no difference and CVs are already subject to normal +/-2 matchmaking.   (Imho it shows, that you (the staff)  never had any intention to balance the current system at all.  Try t8 planes vs t10 ships - not much fun ;). T5 CV vs T7 .... and strafing - does that ring a bell?) Well obviously not as it was said in waterline 3.2. they decide whether they care or not. CV rework programmed by battleship lovers ( according to waterline 3.2).

Thx for your time anyway.

And well done on skipping some important answers. You earned my respect.

[MrConway]

18 hours ago, DatSuga said:

i maybe wrong but for me it reads that the reworks sounds nice for american CVs and bad for japanese CVs.

 

"

Aviation armor (instead of Aircraft Servicing Expert)

Reduces incoming damage caused to aircraft from ships’ short-range AA defense

 

My Taiho Torpedo Bomber have an Torpedo range of 2,7km, the Missouri has a short range AA of 2,4 km /wioth upgrades etc.). So this skill change seems to affect dive bombers more than torp bomber. Including Demolition Expert this buffs Dive Bombers.

 

And by the way...to japanese Cvs finally get better Torps and Bombs? Same Torps and Bombs from Tier 4 to 10....that sucks. Nearly no damage against Tier 10 BBs. That was the main reason i quiet Cvs with the Taiho...plus the fact than at Tier 8 upwards the AA is to strong and i'm not a really good CV player^^

 

 

And the article sais what happens if u had RESEARCHED odd Tier Cvs, but what i u OWN them? I have a Taiho...what happens then? Do i get the ugly easily burning Shokaku back? And what about the Credit compensation. Taiho costs a little bit more than Shokaku.

 

 

Please be aware that all previous stats of carriers are likely to change to be balanced to the new system and the changes in mechanics.

 

18 hours ago, Hellmenace said:

So you still refuse to let people control their carriers even though that feedback has been there from the start, I've played both test so far and I can't see the thought behind this, makes in nearly impossible to defend yourself against strikes and unless I read it wrong you still can't damage con whilst controlling the squad. (if im wrong please correct me)

And why are you removing the Azur Lane camo from people who own it, I don't own the Enterprise atm but i brought the entire pack so i could have the camo for when it finally comes back on sale. But now your taking it away and I wont have the opportunity to buy it back as the collab will probably end before it comes back on sale, so thanks for that.

 

We stated in the article that the Azur Lane camo will be refunded and can then be re-purchased in game!

 

18 hours ago, WarpTank said:

Free commander skills respec only for carriers? But this change will affect all classes, in current meta specing for AA was not to viable because low carrier numbers except at tiers 5-7, if carriers become more popular then respecing commanders in all higher tier ships will be needed too.

 

I am not sure if a general free respec is planned, but I will find out.

 

18 hours ago, hgbn_dk said:

I'm wondering why there is no example of compensations if you have both lines fully purchased, upgraded and still want to keep the CV's. What's the total gain of free xp and credits WG liquidating the odd tiers??

 

We'll have more details closer to release where you will be able to calculate exact amounts, this was just designed to show how we will be proceeding with the refunds.

 

18 hours ago, wilkatis_LV said:

 

@MrConway @Crysantos Hmm, may I ask why?

 

Spotter planes elevated view tends to be extremely useful in certain situations like shooting into smokescreens or having a better aim over islands (not even talking about the 15km view range compared to other planes 11km giving you a lot of spotting capabilities - such as spotting a full stealth Conq at ranges up to 17.1km from you), especially on ships like Montana. It comes with a relatively short duration and a rather long cooldown, this is also why I use the special spotter mod in the 1st slot to get more out of it.

As you can imagine in a situation like this having your spotter shot down is highly inconvenient. Having 2x spotters helps to limit / prevent that to some extent. Hence the Double Floatplanes skill. Why exactly is it removed from Spotters?

 

Good question, I'll endeavour to find out!

[gmomkey]

11 minutes ago, MrConway said:

They will be removed for the time being and might come back in future - we're not saying that they are gone forever. Limiting the amount of ships on the initial release will hopefully make it easier to properly balance them.

so I have a tier 6 IJN CV and if I research the next CV at tier 8  and then you put the odd CV's back in the game . how do I stand with the research . are the odd CV's researched or will I have to go back and research them ??  

and how long do you think they will be out of the game ?? a few months .. half a year ...a year  or more ??  

and I know the +/- 2 battle gap has always been there but at the moment the AA is so so powerful ( Before test 3 ) that even in it's own tier the planes are being wiped out  to fast to make a run .  ( I am no Unicum ) I have tried every way possible to avoid the flack to no avail ..  maybe test 3 will be more balanced ??

[Striker2523]

46 minutes ago, MrConway said:

 

 

I don't quite understand this point, in the current system there is no difference and CVs are already subject to normal +/-2 matchmaking. 

The issue i meant in the post that people will be forced to play in a T10 battle with a t8 carrier for far longer now since there is no T9 middle ground CV with the Taiho and Essexs being removed. So now players will be forced to play mostly higher tier games that there planes are not suited to face for much longer then they currently have to. And speaking as someone who has grinded all the way to the  hakuryu and Lexington i do not look forward to the idea that i will have to play the lexington for almost the double amount of games with most of them most likely being against t10 ships.

 

So my question is if your going to be removing the odd tier CV's either temporarily or permenantly which ever it is will even tier CV's get better MM as we now have double the grind time in the same tier?

[IVemo]

Hiryu, Taiho, Essex etc. are the most iconic of CVs. Taiho, possibly the best looking ship in the whole game :), will surely become available as a premium if the CV change is liked. I suppose that was half of their intention behind the tech tree change, to produce new premiums cheaply.

 

However, what is more important I am afraid that CVs are likely to stay in the margin if this CV change goes live because the new arcadey take is a leap too big towards its own imaginary ship-planes combat while not offering an addictive enough gameplay in return. Namely, CVs in reality were not about chip damage but single massive strikes, which actually failed at least as much as the fantasy chip damage idea but just for different reasons. After all, CVs' advantage that lead to their dominance in WW2 was not their superior striking power but their striking distance (up to a few hundred kilometers) most of which should be negated here.

 

What I would have liked to have seen was a dumbed down RTS, enabling higher plane counts and more realism tuck in. Likely it would not have brought in the masses to play CVs but that should not have been the main objective in the first place, to offer more of the same. Instead, CVs could have been used to spice things up, e.g., to introduce a new danger to the usual gameflow or to offer a different kind of a game experience where multiple CVs were put in a single game. The old CV design did something like that but I believe it altered the game in wrong places and was just unbalanceable with the lack of a proper skill-based MM. Now thinking about it, maybe CVs were just wrongly tiered, Taiho for example actually being an equivalent of a tier XI ship.

[MrWastee]

57 minutes ago, MrConway said:

 

[snip]

 ...could u plz elaborate on why commanders simply get treated like on any line alternation, in regard of all this sheet being a full branch rework? in other words:

 

why, even more in regard of half of the lines get shafted, we'll be sitting on a ton of totally useless and unwanted commanders after the rework, while we may did spend tons of ressources to raise em, what never would've been the case without FORMER cv system (so rts)?.................. thx

[Blaubeeren]

1 hour ago, MrConway said:

... If we let you hand back in only the lower tiers, you would have a ship in port that you have effectively not researched yet.

Well it´s already possible to have a effectively not researched Ship out of a research line (/not premium) in the habour by container, for example (Turenne and Courbet aren´t researched and not gona be, but the higher Tier ships are in habour, Bretagne was in a container as well as the other two):

Argument therefor untrue , you got to come with a better argument or change that part of the compensation

 

Blaubeeren

[hgbn_dk]

2 minutes ago, Blaubeeren said:

Well it´s already possible to have a effectively not researched Ship out of a research line (/not premium) in the habour by container, for example (Turenne and Courbet aren´t researched and not gona be, but the higher Tier ships are in habour, Bretagne was in a container as well as the other two):

Argument therefor untrue , you got to come with a better argument or change that part of the compensation

 

Blaubeeren

Don't think you got the point of the compensation... Of course you can't keep a higher tier CV and claim compensation for the lower ones.... Compensation a is meant for those not wanting to play CV after the rework.. The rest is going to get a compensation for the difference of the odd tier removed.

[Blaubeeren]

2 minutes ago, hgbn_dk said:

Don't think you got the point of the compensation... Of course you can't keep a higher tier CV and claim compensation for the lower ones.... Compensation a is meant for those not wanting to play CV after the rework.. The rest is going to get a compensation for the difference of the odd tier removed.

Not about no compensation for ships not in habour,

about not getting the higer tier ships (new) you got (old) in habour as you have sold the lower ones some time ago

[MrConway]

1 hour ago, AdmiralCollingwood said:

First of all, I would prefer a personal conversation (ts3?) if you have some time, but as it will not happen here some more thoughts.

Thx for your time anyway.

And well done on skipping some important answers. You earned my respect.

 

Yes, permanent camouflages can be sold for a full doubloon refund. (What about captains retraining for other classes / nations one would have grinded instead. Wouldn`t it be wiser to move the captains xp of carriers to the free captains XP pool - and if you scrap our carriers - cant you give some steel at least ?) Though  it might not be to late to stop it - free after the saying:"You dont have to say B after A, if you saw that A was wrong ?

 

 

They will be removed for the time being and might come back in future - we're not saying that they are gone forever. Limiting the amount of ships on the initial release will hopefully make it easier to properly balance them.  ( MAYBE JUST BALANCE the existing System instead, or even better bathtube mode for all)

 

 

To explain, when you decide to hand one of the ships back in, you will get all of the XP spent on researching it back as well. If we let you hand back in only the lower tiers, you would have a ship in port that you have effectively not researched yet. (Do not forget to implement a warning in game)

 

 

I don't quite understand this point, in the current system there is no difference and CVs are already subject to normal +/-2 matchmaking.   (Imho it shows, that you (the staff)  never had any intention to balance the current system at all.  Try t8 planes vs t10 ships - not much fun ;). T5 CV vs T7 .... and strafing - does that ring a bell?) Well obviously not as it was said in waterline 3.2. they decide whether they care or not. CV rework programmed by battleship lovers ( according to waterline 3.2).

 

Please try not to edit inside of a quote, it doesn't automatically get added when quoted again.

 

If you want to have a more face-to-face discussion on these issues swing by one of our Twitch streams!

 

What about captains retraining for other classes / nations one would have grinded instead. Wouldn`t it be wiser to move the captains xp of carriers to the free captains XP pool - and if you scrap our carriers - cant you give some steel at least ?) Though  it might not be to late to stop it - free after the saying:"You dont have to say B after A, if you saw that A was wrong ?

• I am already passing on the elite captain XP suggestion.

 

 

1 hour ago, gmomkey said:

so I have a tier 6 IJN CV and if I research the next CV at tier 8  and then you put the odd CV's back in the game . how do I stand with the research . are the odd CV's researched or will I have to go back and research them ??  

and how long do you think they will be out of the game ?? a few months .. half a year ...a year  or more ??  

and I know the +/- 2 battle gap has always been there but at the moment the AA is so so powerful ( Before test 3 ) that even in it's own tier the planes are being wiped out  to fast to make a run .  ( I am no Unicum ) I have tried every way possible to avoid the flack to no avail ..  maybe test 3 will be more balanced ??

 

If/when we reintroduce them they would likely come as an alternate line with the same alternating tiers, reintegrating the intermediate tiers would be difficult.

 

Please bear in mind that we are only really getting started on the balancing of everything now, we needed to make sure the mechanics work first.

 

48 minutes ago, Striker2523 said:

The issue i meant in the post that people will be forced to play in a T10 battle with a t8 carrier for far longer now since there is no T9 middle ground CV with the Taiho and Essexs being removed. So now players will be forced to play mostly higher tier games that there planes are not suited to face for much longer then they currently have to. And speaking as someone who has grinded all the way to the  hakuryu and Lexington i do not look forward to the idea that i will have to play the lexington for almost the double amount of games with most of them most likely being against t10 ships.

 

So my question is if your going to be removing the odd tier CV's either temporarily or permenantly which ever it is will even tier CV's get better MM as we now have double the grind time in the same tier?

 

I cannot comment on any potential MM changes yet, but bear in mind that there will be less XP needed to get to the next carrier than is currently needed to advance by two tiers.

 

23 minutes ago, MrWastee said:

 ...could u plz elaborate on why commanders simply get treated like on any line alternation, in regard of all this sheet being a full branch rework? in other words:

 

why, even more in regard of half of the lines get shafted, we'll be sitting on a ton of totally useless and unwanted commanders after the rework, while we may did spend tons of ressources to raise em, what never would've been the case without FORMER cv system (so rts)?.................. thx

 

I will pass on the suggestion to use Elite Commander XP instead.

 

11 minutes ago, Blaubeeren said:

Well it´s already possible to have a effectively not researched Ship out of a research line (/not premium) in the habour by container, for example (Turenne and Courbet aren´t researched and not gona be, but the higher Tier ships are in habour, Bretagne was in a container as well as the other two):

Argument therefor untrue , you got to come with a better argument or change that part of the compensation

 

Blaubeeren

 

You're right we have done this with the mission unlockable ships in the past. I'll look into why this rule was suggested.

[gmomkey]

@MrConway Thank you for your Swift reply . 

I agree this is only the beginning fingers crossed it all goes well ,We have a lot of work to do .. looking forward to test 3 

[MrWastee]

16 minutes ago, MrConway said:

 

[...]

 

 

I will pass on the suggestion to use Elite Commander XP instead.

 

 

[...]

 

thx, much appreciated ! plz pass on my points as well, as at least to me this really is important. mostly i'm overall satisfied with their way to handle such things yet (xcept 4 things like ship-mas gate ^^), but in this case i yet see they really lack in perspective in regard of commanders/spared them in sense of "ah, its just a rework"...

it should be more like "it's a full point zero thing, get it right! this time it's not a simple rework of a line and shuffling some ships"!

 

 

on a sidenote: i can see the reason for starting in with only half the lines.... lower number of different ships means easier balancing process after implemantation due to less crossrelations like different planes and ship AA. that way down one can balance around the few and then start to add new stuff...

 

indeed i can see the reason players dont like this as well, simply because this approach now makes it a bit look like "let's rush it to simly get fulfilled", while the process rather should be a real intensive and time consuming one in regard to the matter.

in my feeling as well the new cv's should come with full lines (even though i gonna scrap mine; may try it in some years lol...)!

 

same goes for working out things like compensations. to cater everything but leave one thing kinda out, it comes around a bit rushed. at least in my perception.

 

2cts

[hgbn_dk]

9 minutes ago, Blaubeeren said:

Not about no compensation for ships not in habour,

about not getting the higer tier ships (new) you got (old) in habour as you have sold the lower ones some time ago

You don't get XP back when you sell a ship... Sold ship long ago must be like every other ship in the game. You don't get XP back there either.. Only fair

[CaptainCoconutUK]

Having completed the US CV line recently, I feel let down by these proposed changes. If WG feel that this is going to be better for gameplay, MM or whatever, they are wrong. WG are creating a precidence here by removing stock ships from a line, I never thought WG would ever do anything like this, seems I was wrong.
My favourite ship in the game is the Independance & it is to be removed (albeit temporarily I hope because I really don't know what I'm going to do with my spare captains except leave them in reserve).
I don't care about rembursment, what I care about is retaining the stock ships we have earned the right to play.

I understand the problems, CV's are difficult to learn effectivley & disparities

can occur between players capabilities. WG must understand though that this happens thoughout all lines, it just is exasperated with this ship type & considering the dominance of CV's (which should be the case, considering current naval tactics), something must be done to elivate such differences between players to give each side a 'even' chance of victory. This will never be solved.
Removing stock ships is wrong & even though I feel there will initially be an increase in CV use, over time WG might realise their error in judgement here when the #'s of CV players dwindle to almost nothing. By removing the RTS tactical element, WG have effectivly cut it's own nose off to spite it's face. Arcade style play may be nice for a while but over time it will become repetative & therefore boring.

 

Oh, & one last thing on a different subject... What the hell have you done to the Black Swan!

[Blaubeeren]

15 minutes ago, hgbn_dk said:

You don't get XP back when you sell a ship... Sold ship long ago must be like every other ship in the game. You don't get XP back there either.. Only fair

Not about XP leaved on the way to get the higher tiers either,

about this marked part (at the bottom of the news-page):

You now got it?

[ImperialAdmiral]

After thinking more about it, removing carriers will be another nail to th coffin for carriers. Because you are wrong that it will bring new people. Sure there will be an increase of people that want to try it but with 4 carriers per nation and even with British line it will get boring very soon. Also leaving fake ships like Hakuryu as top shall deprive people from motivation of grinding even those trees fully.

 

You should really rethink that decision.

[Salkeaner]

Next Coal/Steel/Premium Ship: Taiho/Essex... Are you insane?

I am a collector, removing half of two trees, which are part of my collection, feels like steeling.

[antean]

This CV rework is 'insane' & WG is still going along with it. That is 'telling' enough, imho.

[Maty83_Cz]

I don't like WG removing CVs from T5,7 and 9. You are removing some incredibly important ships, like the Essex (Most numerous capital ship class ever made, WTF WG?), Taiho (Yeah, their damacon was crap, but it was the most modern existing IJN CV), Bogue (Just why? The first purpose-built US CV is getting removed), Zuiho and Hiryu (Actual ships, Hiryu heavily damaged Yorktown, Zuiho also participated in WWII), Independence (8/9 of these participated in the battle of the Phillipine sea, the last one got decommissioned from the Spanish navy in 1989)

ALL of these are historically very important ship classes that are getting removed for NO APPARENT REASON. That is because the changes are made to make CV(L)s more accessible (Impressive double-think, isn't it?) Since the new CVs are having the rework, there is no reason for this radical of a change to an existing line, especially removing ships outright (Smells of free premiums doesn't it?)

While I understand this action might be considered simply for adding in RN and other carrier lines, why not simply put the tier gap only where it is needed due to a lack of blueprints and ships. With the British, you have the Hermes at T4/5, Victorious at T5/6, Ark Royal at T7, Illustrious T8/9, possibly Unicorn at T8, T10 can be easily dug up I hope. There is only a minor gap possibly at T4/5.

As for a final note, since Hosho is a purpose-built CV (With a massive amount of planes you can choose to give her owing to her long service life), why do you have to have a converted coal hauler in USS Langley for the US? Just... Why?

(That sentence also sums up my reaction to the entirety of the CV changes)

[1031]

Q: if someone had 19 point captains in all ships,  how many will be left after the change  ? Will they be trained to a lower level CV ?

[Klimons]

Good luck with MM in that tech tree. Unless you constantly going to play T10 ( and most likely lose credits every battle …) you are going to be bottom/mid every time. It is going to be awesome flying one t8 squad vs all that t10 AA ….

[DeletedUser]

Again - what happend to the Permanent bought Camoflages (for Dubloons) and also what happends with Event Camoflages like Halloween (Shokaku and Lexington) or the SpaceCamoflages for the Hakuryu, do we get a Compensation for this or not. Also what happends with the Ship XP itself? In my Case i have 5 Million Ship XP on my Midway DONT!!! Tell me its gone, if i sell it and please also dont try to say, you have to Pay Money e.g. Dubloons for it, to convert it somehow...

 

On the other Hand, depending on the Postings and Answers, Replies and Reactions above. It seems like you have opened a Pandoras Box and i realy hope you take some Time to think over what you have done. It doesnt matter now, if your a CV Player - Main CV Player or a Non CV Player, the Answers here are all the same. It´s not necessary to Change something to make it more Console friendly... i´ve written down something similar in the German Section. Every Single Update, there are Bugs reported... and the Size of Bugreports grows finally into an ammount of 3 Filled Sides of Paper which was forwarded to Wargaming BUT instead that you Guys react on it, you just throw everything over Board and say "Suprise, Carrier Rework" no Comment. And im feeling very well saying, you made a lot of PPL angry and its good the Way it turns... Because i hope finally you react on it in a DECENT Way!