Latest Leaks From WG Fest 2018 - Discussion Thread

[m3c0]

6 hours ago, Aragathor said:

So a paper line of BBs no one outside Russia really wants and a CV line fitted into the failure you call a "rework".

I'm not interested at all, in any of the things you have shown.

+

37 minutes ago, Crowarior said:

Lol... Russian BBs. The line no one wanted and it will only increase the powercreep even further.  

1. I'm outside Russia (so much outside!) and I want those ships. Now what? If you dont like them guys - it's fine, it's your opinion. But please don't try to act as a representative of us all, OK? I dont care if they are paper ships or not. I really like the fact that we will finally get new, REGULAR ships to play with, because I'm so tired of all those premium boats WG is spamming lately. That's what matters to me - new branches with regular ships!

 

And I have different point of view about those BBs. I'm afraid that some of them might be really crappy. Because WG will try to satisfy all the dudes crying "russian bias, o ma gad !1!". I just remember the time when I was playing WoT - all the whiners who were screaming the loudest "russian bias !!11!" were the guys who have never played with a soviet tank (i.e. they knew nothing about all their weaknesses).... And I hated some of those tanks so much. Thats why I think we will have something similar here - a strong (OP) tier 9/10 ship as a bait and lots of crippled and not fun to play boats on the way to it.

 

I think those BBs will have a very nice feature (probably powerful but inaccurate guns and slow turrets), some other questionable (i.e. useless) feature and lots of weaknesses. I mean, just look at all this superstructure! Combine this with large hit points pool (questionable feature?) and we have the perfect torches! I bet those BBs will burn better than Warspite and HE spammers will just love them. And as we saw they will have weak or no AA. Now imagine the new battles with at least 2 CVs per team every game... Lovely! Those ships will be perfect for damage farming for all the enemy CV/CA players. Lets hope WG will manage to make them properly balanced.

 

2. As for the new british CVs - I have mixed feelings here. On the one hand I'm happy we get new ships, as I already said above. But on the other - I dont know... Basically I dont like the CV rework, it's just wrong. I'm at tier 7 both US and IJN CVs at the moment and I like the way it is now! I'm not a very good CV player, but I still enjoy the current play style and I still can be useful for the team. I will really miss the old carriers. So, no idea what to say here about those british CVs.

[Hugh_Ruka]

Quote

A battleship of Project 24. She is armored with three triple 406 mm or 457 mm (optional) turrets.

OK ... I get you are lazy and don't want to redo the screenshots into English ... the whole world can read Azbuka after all ... or they soon will have to ...

 

But when you can't get plain English in the article correct ?

 

SHE IS ARMED WITH ...

[EkV92]

Paper russian BB line, with only a single one being an actually launched ship, getting implemented next...

 

...in the meantime, in Italy

 

I get it, Russia is still the biggest market for WG, and probably not enough people care about the Regia Marina to make a good return of investment on the development of anything Italian, and I mean anything that isn't the most expensive premium battleship that historically only managed to be sunk the time it left port to surrender. I also get how balancing something almost entirely made up and that existed only on a napkin is far easier than juggling hard and soft stats from vessels that actually existed (not that an Italian line can be fully made from various degrees of "real" vessels, but that's beside the point), so I understand how a russian BB line is the lowest hanging fruit right now, but I can't refrain from going: "OH COME ON WG! NOT AGAIN!"

 

Italy only had premiums for so long now that it starts to feel like an extortion (for a lack of better terms), and while I absolutely love my Giulio Cesare, I'd also like to play a proper line. Not that I'm not used to see WG go "Italy soon™" and then give priority to literally everything else to the point I've dropped the game way before an actual Italian line managed to get implement. Looking at you WoT.

[CAP98100]

t9, arms race, ranked ... all in one battle?


AKA how to make interest to sell coal premiums?

[mondog]

8 hours ago, ComradeKatya said:

Sure, let's also remove all of the US, British, Japanese, French, and German ships that never fought or were made.

Yet we'd still have up to Tier 9 in most of them. There's still dozens of British,  US, Japanese, French, German and Italian ships that could be added to this game which actually were built. 

[Grumpy_Shark]

I think you add too much content too fast. You need to slow down.
 

[CollingwoodDK]

12 hours ago, Vampiric_Penguin said:

I'm excited for the British carriers. Hoping we see Ark Royal as well, even if as a premium ship.

What carriers - you mean the thing steered by autopilot into islands, you can not control and hardly ever see (except it sinks to the ground)? And If did not misunderstood you can not control secondaries anymore to fire at a priority target. The old concept might have needed some balance but this ... is  only a very bad idea!

What about real improvements instead, like being able to control different turrets in different directions, or using consumables with the same key ?

[JapLance]

Carriers and a line of 7/8 paper ships.

 

Excitement under -9000

[Heal_My_Bacon]

Russian BB's nice! I don't comment about CV's yet... Where's Italian tech Tree? I want my Pasta Cruisers 

[Panocek]

12 hours ago, Anthoniusii said:

 

I saw many Soviet BBs that existed only as blueprints.

QUESTION: Will they be over powered comparing to real BBs that proven their worth in the battle?

WG said Lion was under construction as British best BB but it has the same hit points pool with a tier 6 BB when Soviet never existed cruisers have more hit points pool that that battleship!!!!!

Why British ships are so under powered? Conqueror has 18000 hit points less than Yamato when WG advertised that design as the British Yamato attempt (what a joke)!

Where are the British Heavy cruisers? Will they be under powered too? Like the poor LEANDER that its main gun range is EQUAL with 99% of destroyers main gun range that it was supose to hunt and kill?

Why British Battleships do not have RADAR as they were the 1st ships equipted with this device after the Greek Destroyer Vasilisa Olga?

EDIT: AS for arms race i have a proposal based on the features of spesific misions that worked perfectly.

Each team will have a convoy of 3 transport ships moving in the last line of the map's side the team starts. There Destroyers will replanish their torpedo (and finally have a solution to unlimited torpedo launces), ships will have their repairs. Sinking that convoy will give enemy team extra points forcing the team that owns it to guard it ...

Its not like Conqueror have the best survivability due to lol heal and citadel placed in separate submarine.

 

Leander is okay, Fiji next door is a monster ship.

 

Build yourself a time machine, go back to Britain 1930 and ask Tea Navy officers to put more emphasis on heavy cruisers so you can play them in some internet game about boats.

 

Radar consumable is "balancing reasons". Don't play realism hard unless you want to backfire at you. HARD.

[Ovdose]

Quote

The gameplay of the updated aircraft carriers will no longer resemble a real-time strategy. It will become much more intuitive, exciting, and spectacular, and the class itself will be much more balanced relative to other ships in the game.

Translation: the gameplay of the updated carriers will no longer feel intuitive, exciting and spectacular but the class itself will be much more balanced relative to other ships in the game.

 

As for the new BB line, I don't mind them being paper ships. I'm going to try them anyway.

[Helgi_Hanson]

may I just leave it here? small gift from russian realm:

origin - Dystopian Wars, Russian Coalition Pakhtusov Class Battleship MKII

and for information - most part of "ru/cis" community doesnt approve the name "Kremlin"

[Karasu_Browarszky]

I always confuse 'Kremlin' with 'Gremlin'....

[Bluestrategist]

20 hours ago, pzkpfwv1d said:

Nobody was very happy with the CV rework

A bit of a sweeping statement. SOMEBODY must have liked it!

[Bluestrategist]

47 minutes ago, Ovdose said:

Translation: the gameplay of the updated carriers will no longer feel intuitive, exciting and spectacular...

You genuinely found the old RTS style of CV play as "intuitive, exciting and spectacular"? I respectfully disagree, as I must have been playing a different game.

[obs1rver]

Where is the Battleship Potemkin...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_battleship_Potemkin

[Karasu_Browarszky]

2 minutes ago, obs1rver said:

Where is the Battleship Potemkin...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_battleship_Potemkin

 

Sadly, it's one of the pre-dreadnought battleships.

[SMS_GrafSpee]

27 minutes ago, Bluestrategist said:

A bit of a sweeping statement. SOMEBODY must have liked it!

Yes the wg developement team - ofc they like their "work". No matter what they do to others or themselves. The attitude they show towards paying users in their videos is the last thing I ever expected to see around a game.

 

25 minutes ago, Bluestrategist said:

You genuinely found the old RTS style of CV play as "intuitive, exciting and spectacular"? I respectfully disagree, as I must have been playing a different game.

Wasn't meant to me, but if you want to claim that cv fulfill only a little bit  of their historical role - yes. Some tweaking and a Tutorial n form of a scenario might have helped.

[Shiva]

What is the 3rd ship branch?

I see 2 of them. British CV and Russian BB's. 3rd is?

 

O wait... Do they mean THIS years " Three new ship branches  ".

Then no wonder I did find a 3rd announced ship branch, except British CV and Russian BB's.

[Ovdose]

55 minutes ago, Bluestrategist said:

You genuinely found the old RTS style of CV play as "intuitive, exciting and spectacular"? I respectfully disagree, as I must have been playing a different game.

I was exaggerating a little but in my opinion the rework will lead to them being less intuitive, exciting and spectacular than what we have right now.

 

I'm not sure if forum rules allow mentioning other games or companies (couldn't even find the rules after a quick search) but I do enjoy one of Blizzard's RTS games a lot. It might be just me but I believe WG should have enhanced cv gameplay by adding to the RTS-style (it feels more like a MOBA or a mobile game though) gameplay they had going rather than turning away from it. Maybe adding more squadrons and increasing the carriers' plane capacity while lowering individual planes' damage potential would've done the trick.

[TicoXotaR]

22 hours ago, LonesomePolecat said:

WoW already announced HMS Indomitable on F/B as T8 prem. Chck "WoW Devlopment Blog".

great! all that's left is the HMS Ark Royal for Tier 7. And HMS Argus for Tier 3! :D

[Feign_Death]

10 minutes ago, Ovdose said:

I was exaggerating a little but in my opinion the rework will lead to them being less intuitive, exciting and spectacular than what we have right now.

 

I'm not sure if forum rules allow mentioning other games or companies (couldn't even find the rules after a quick search) but I do enjoy one of Blizzard's RTS games a lot. It might be just me but I believe WG should have enhanced cv gameplay by adding to the RTS-style (it feels more like a MOBA or a mobile game though) gameplay they had going rather than turning away from it. Maybe adding more squadrons and increasing the carriers' plane capacity while lowering individual planes' damage potential would've done the trick.

Imo the rework is wg using PC players to test carrier play for console. I dont like the new cv rework one bit. Its silly being spotted at the startpoint before you even have reached max speed, and they never get deplaned. What a silly thing.

[Anthoniusii]

2 hours ago, Panocek said:

Its not like Conqueror have the best survivability due to lol heal and citadel placed in separate submarine.

 

Leander is okay, Fiji next door is a monster ship.

 

Build yourself a time machine, go back to Britain 1930 and ask Tea Navy officers to put more emphasis on heavy cruisers so you can play them in some internet game about boats.

 

Radar consumable is "balancing reasons". Don't play realism hard unless you want to backfire at you. HARD.

Lets take examples one by one: Lion Tier IX Battleship hit points pool 67900 with the 2nd hull.

Kronhtadt tier IX heavy cruiser hit points 71050

Freidrich De Grobe tier IX german Battleship 84300

84300-67900= 16400 hit points pool diference. Many "wise" guys emphasise the abillity of Lion to have quick heal WHEN that consumable is activated. But they forget one thing.

The 16400 hit points offer the usperior ship 50% MORE time available to re-use the repair party  consumable than lion espesialy in tier 10 battle that hundreds of HE OP shells ignite a fire every 2nd shot!!!!

The comparison of Conqueror with the tier X German Battleship is even worst!

Conqueror hit points pool 82900 (actually equal with tier 9 German BB) , tier X battleship 105800!

105800-82900 = 22900 hit points that can be equal with two torpedo hits more or 4 minutes under constant fire (the fire the HE shells create).

WG advertised Conqueror as the British attempt to create their own Yamato. So either there is a British ships bias here or WG things that british designers were idiots and incapable!

Those 22900 hit points less give NO TIME AT ALL to use the repair party  consumable for a 2nd time when the ship is under fire from it enemies!!! That is why in all battles Lions and Conquerors are no1 targets because all teams know that they are the weakest ships in game. Unless the player that uses them prefer to stay hiden and simply wait the battle to be over! Also the ammunition of Conqueror is more expensive than Yamato's!!! And i am talking the ammunition of the stock main guns of the ship!

[1MajorKoenig]

48 minutes ago, Shiva said:

What is the 3rd ship branch?

I see 2 of them. British CV and Russian BB's. 3rd is?

 

O wait... Do they mean THIS years " Three new ship branches  ".

Then no wonder I did find a 3rd announced ship branch, except British CV and Russian BB's.

 

Russian CVs

Russian Submarines

Third Russian DD Split

Russian CA/CL Split

Russian BCs

 

Pick one ;-)

 

 

(on a more serious note: Italians. Likely the cruisers I would guess. French Destroyers are also still to come)

[Karasu_Browarszky]

1 hour ago, 1MajorKoenig said:

 

Russian CVs

Russian Submarines

Third Russian DD Split

Russian CA/CL Split

Russian BCs

 

Pick one ;-)

 

 

(on a more serious note: Italians. Likely the cruisers I would guess. French Destroyers are also still to come)

 

Russian submarines? Can't wait to see those (or Russian CV's.. do they need a lot of paper for those?). IIRC someone said that the Soviet submarine fleet had the dubious distinction of losing more tonnage than it sunk during the war....