Public Test of Update 0.8.0 - Discussion Thread

[teen_geisha16]

I had been cursing for days and I did not know everything, over half of the cv's technological tree is loaded, bravo wargaming this can not be worse

[antean]

On 12/30/2018 at 4:16 PM, StringWitch said:

I'm more concerned about what'll happen to my AA-specced non-CV commanders

FUBAR & SNAFU ….  just as WF always manages to 'fix' things.

 

I'm not wasting my time on this public test. I saw what a FARCE the CV rework is going to be in the earlier test sessions.

 No amount of polishing this particular apple will hide its rotten interior.

[Gl0cK_17]

*edited*

[MRGTB]

On 12/29/2018 at 2:55 PM, TheWiggleBottom said:

2. Those torps can be dropped way too close. It's just terrifying how close the planes can come. The drop is up to a point where dodging torps just won't work. And that's just wave 1. The CV player can turn its planes around and do 2 more waves. That's 18 torps hits if you're unlucky as a BB player (or lucky if you're the CV player). And a say BB player in particularly for good reasons. I saw a DD player struggle to dodge the torps. How can a BB defend against it, if even a DD player struggles? 

Wouldn't that mean though that ships with short AA range guns would become more effective if the planes are dropping torps closer in now? Right now it tends to be a case that short range AA on some ships doesn't do them much good because torps usually get dropped outside that short range AA bubble.

 

I get what you say, that you have less time to dodge the torps dropped. But at same time you have more AA guns now coming into action to shoot the planes being closer in.

 

Never mind, edited. Posted this in wrong thread.

[StringWitch]

I suspect having the fighter consumable will be the biggest AA asset a ship can have, post 0.8.0.

[teen_geisha16]

 

is what it takes to get them out quickly, running and badly

[anonym_mlJIAFnOwMVb]

after all the cc's that advised against this you decided to go forward with it anyway. Rushed, without player input, and lazy. Nice work WG.  Your shop is quickly becoming WoT.

[Gl0cK_17]

unless the AA doubled or even quadrupled across the board to what it is now on PTS its going to be a complete shitfest

in one of the earlier closed tests the unbuffed by modules or skills AA was strong enough to wipe atleast enough bombers so that the follow up attack could be taken out. that felt somewhat acceptable  for normal ship players.
whats on the PTS feels like your just a target drone for CVs, constant dodging CVs, constants dots (like we needed more). Even a American cruiser cant wack a dent in the endless waves of bombers. (and good [edited]luck trying to overlap those 6kmish AA auras in a battle)

Its a game, games are played to have fun.
Ive been playing since closed beta with many changes to classes or mechanics, but i always had fun.
But this  . . .  . thing going live in the version thats on PTS will suck the fun right of it.

[Yohane1]

Considering WG didnt listen to the majority of the playerbase.

 

Automatic Consumables makes tactics go away. BB any form of logical sense of gaming.

When making an extra button to switch between squadron and ship DOES NOT make the game more difficult.

Players should be able to have more of that interaction.

AA rating is heavily nerved compared to what we have now. AA is only for self defence and thus CV's will become more powerfull then they currently are. Yes im a CV main and yes i do like the global change idea though it really needs some minor tweaking.

[kneecapper]

"After numerous stages of Closed Tests and three major Open Beta Tests, we are happy to announce that the new aircraft carrier gameplay is ready"

ROFL

[EikvandeDeik]

Just heard of the cv-"update"...

 

One simple question: Why???

 

Playing a CV was a bit like playing a RTS.

It was good.

Now flying only one squadron... who would want that?

[TicoXotaR]

when's Round 2 gonna be released?

 

[antean]

1 hour ago, EikvandeDeik said:

Now flying only one squadron... who would want that?

WG?. I doubt any CV player, with any sort of intelligence, would want just one squadron.

[StringWitch]

On 12/28/2018 at 1:51 AM, ironTiger said:

Battle Stations Midway here we come!!!!!!!!!!!!!   Some body get the Sippy Cups out and the P.B.J. sandwiches.....    Kiddy time is here......           SIGH..... (FACE PALM )                

 

If it were like the Battlestations series it'd actually be good.

 

You can turn on limited ammo for planes in the settings (at least in BSPacific).

Fighters are a controllable unit instead of this weird consumable thing. Can even carry small bombs at agility cost — the sort of tradeoff choice players like to be able to make.

Rear gunners are actually effective. Massing bombers together into waves so their fire lines converge is a valid tactic.

Plane altitude is a thing. Intercepts need to be done early enough.

True manual AA.

Controllable floatplanes (can even land on water).

Magazine explosions are damage chunk instead of instant kill BS.

[wot_2016_gunner]

In fact, when i saw the rework video, when it was announced, i thought that it was going to be similar to the Battlestations series, which i played before playing WoWS.

 

The ability to control the squadron is in fact the only thing i like about the rework.

 

I also have in program, when 0.8.0 goes live, to do a sort of request to introduce different loadouts to the planes (realistic loadouts) like HE or AP rockets, HE or AP bombs, different kind of bombs, depending on the weight of the bombs, torpedoes. For example, the B5N "Kate",in real life, could have the following loadouts:

 

six 30kg Bombs
six 50kg Bombs
three 100kg Bombs

one 250kg Bomb
one 500kg Bomb
one 600kg Bomb
one Type 91 Torpedo

 

 With the possibility for the player to swamp between different loadouts both in the port and during the battle, however, in battle, it will take time to swamp for example between torpedoes and bombs. I think it would be nice, because it would give players the ability to  experiment with different loadouts and find the ones that fit their own playstyle. Again this is a request that i will make when tha update goes live, so i would like to see if you like my idea or not.

 

Also, when they will introduce submarines, spotter planes are going to be more important than they are now, because they could carry depth charges.

 

HOW TO FIX THE REWORK? 

 

Simple, just look at the Battlestations series and just get insiration from those games. I'm not saying to copy, just making it similar.

 

Please, let me know if you like my idea of the different loadouts. 

[wot_2016_gunner]

I mean, when i play CVs now, the only thing that bugs me is the Fighters vs Fighters at low tiers because you can't strafe and it's very RNG, but other that that i enjoy the RTS gameplay.

[cookiemonster66]

WG your *Edited* if you think this rework is good for the game, i predict a 25% drop in your player base almost immediately after the release of 0.8.

-----

On 12/30/2018 at 9:01 PM, antean said:

FUBAR & SNAFU ….  just as WF always manages to 'fix' things.

 

I'm not wasting my time on this public test. I saw what a FARCE the CV rework is going to be in the earlier test sessions.

 No amount of polishing this particular apple will hide its rotten interior.

My old gran used to say *Edited* she must have seen the cv rework in that statement lol

[antean]

2 hours ago, wot_2016_gunner said:

Please, let me know if you like my idea of the different loadouts.

Sorry, wot_2016_gunner, I had to down thumb your suggestion(s).

Please, don't submit 'anything' that might induce WG to continue with this rework CV FARCE.

A  number of current CV players want this Frankenstein CV FARCE to die a rapid death (if we can't prevent it's birth/creation).

[MRGTB]

On 12/29/2018 at 7:44 PM, DinkyDi said:

What about players who dont play CVs at all (like myself) ? It means, that I cannot complete all directives needed for another stage ? Or how it would be ?

Just do what what I did. Buy a CV to complete the task and then sell it on.

 

Playing CV, other than just to complete the mission directives is pretty boring. Point and click on a map.

[Tatsfield]

I play CV explicitly for the RTS experience.  I enjoy it. If I want to see explosions, shoot at things and race around the board, (see I'm still thinking RTS), I play other classes of ship but for a mental exercise and real time decisions which if fluffed loose you the battle, that's what was so good about the old CV play.  If you think from this that I'm a great CV player, I'm not.  But I really enjoyed the RTS.  Now I suspect that I'll drop CVs, and then drop the rest of the game as I don't enjoy the First Person Shooter aspect of naval gunfire battles.  All sound and fury and appealing to the juvenile streak in games players but not for me.  When I think how hard I worked to grind out my Essex and that I'll hardly have time to enjoy the opportunity of flying two fighter squadrons at the same time any more.  In fact I won't be flying any fighter squadrons as I understand they will become robot consumables.  How sad for the concept of skilled and heroic naval fighter pilots.  They are about to be come a sort of air to air kamikazi missiles.  I know most players don't like CV players and take the opportunity to let them know it in no uncertain terms when they don't get from the CV that to which they think they are entitled, but now they are going to become CV players for the FPS effects and the naval "chess player" strategists will all retire gracefully.

[wot_2016_gunner]

8 ore fa, antean ha scritto:

Sorry, wot_2016_gunner, I had to down thumb your suggestion(s).

Please, don't submit 'anything' that might induce WG to continue with this rework CV FARCE.

A  number of current CV players want this Frankenstein CV FARCE to die a rapid death (if we can't prevent it's birth/creation).

Mine was just an idea in the extreme case that the rework is continued without changes.

 

You don't like it, that's ok. 

 

I'm also a player who doesn't want the rework, but i'm also preparing for the worst.

[SirAmra]

I will take a break from wows when the CV rework hits the live servers.

I don't support this rework, and I'm either hoping the CV players will have lost interest quickly or they hotfix to undo the change.

I feel more and more meh towards this game now cause of this.

I've already left wot cause of their rework there and the bonds for enhanced equipment.

Looks like they are doing a fine job with the same here.

[sneakyscotsman]

.The main thing about this CV rework is that it is BORING TO PLAY. I'm not bothered if in real life CVs have changed naval warfare etc ,this is a game that I play for enjoyment. I don't like the RTS gameplay so don't play Carriers just now but at least I can some what counter them with AA ,not on the test server though AA does sod all. The CV gameplay is too dull for words, squad gets wiped out by fighters, no problem just go get more ,surely there needs to be either a limit or a longer wait between farming runs. Or even better an option to select a  CV free game mode.Unfortunately it will make absolutely no difference what is said here ,nothing will change WGs headlong stubborn charge.

[ArtyBlaster]

Thanks for the memories WarGaming, but once this update is released  its farewell from me and most of my clan. 

[iJoby]

@The_EURL_Guy Do we have PTS 0.8.0 Round 2 today?