Jump to content
You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.
Gvozdika

CV Rework - the other Elephant in the Room

79 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[YARRR]
Beta Tester
8,723 posts
14,669 battles
6 minutes ago, Gvozdika said:

Someone buys an Atlanta or grinds enough steel for a Flint.

 

Wanna know something funny? Atlanta/Flint are now among the worst AA ships because most of their AA power is concentrated on the easily dodged long range ones.

As both an avid Atlanta and CV player, this is sad and hilarious to me at the same time.

  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SWTP]
Players
575 posts
7,334 battles

When every bb Kevin will start tp cry about bad CV and will stop buying staff WG will react. Probably by nerfing CVs so badly that nobody will play them. 

  • Cool 4
  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,815 posts
16,233 battles

as i stated multiple times 

i think the CV rework is terrible cause it again is : A GAME WITHIN A GAME

a cv rework would need to be closer to other ships 
you piloting the ship and the planes are your guns of some kind
this would be balanceable and would allow people to transfer skills

the otherthing why the CV rework is terrible

the AA rework is UTTER TRASH

  • Cool 11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
103 posts
4,313 battles
11 minutes ago, El2aZeR said:

 

Wanna know something funny? Atlanta/Flint are now among the worst AA ships because most of their AA power is concentrated on the easily dodged long range ones.

As both an avid Atlanta and CV player, this is sad and hilarious to me at the same time.

My point exactly. People may have bought an AA cruiser and reasonably expected it to be good at...AA? 

 

Ship characteristics change all the time - that's part of the game. However anything that previously had good AA now, suddenly doesn't. If those are premium ships - that complicates the usual WG policy of not nerfing premium content without offering some kind of compensation (e.g. smoke firing and Belfast/Kutuzov) for players unhappy with the new changes. 

 

6 minutes ago, DariusJacek said:

When every bb Kevin will start tp cry about bad CV and will stop buying staff WG will react. Probably by nerfing CVs so badly that nobody will play them. 

 

The classes most hit are those least resistant to damage-over-time with no way of healing back fires/floods, particularly cruisers and DDs. I raised the point of the DD - because these are particularly vulnerable to being hit hard and early on in the game - way before they can even contest a cap. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
[NWP]
Players
878 posts
6,979 battles

OP makes some brilliant points here.

 

I too would love to know what WG's response to these will be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
[SCRUB]
Beta Tester
1,144 posts
11,248 battles
Just now, Mr_Tayto said:

OP makes some brilliant points here.

 

I too would love to know what WG's response to these will be.

 

Nonexistent.

 

I know it. You know it. We all know it.

 

They just won't acknowledge this impact. To do so would be to open themselves up to growing pressure for compensation.

 

 

  • Cool 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SWTP]
Players
575 posts
7,334 battles
4 minuty temu, Gvozdika napisał:

My point exactly. People may have bought an AA cruiser and reasonably expected it to be good at...AA? 

 

Ship characteristics change all the time - that's part of the game. However anything that previously had good AA now, suddenly doesn't. If those are premium ships - that complicates the usual WG policy of not nerfing premium content without offering some kind of compensation (e.g. smoke firing and Belfast/Kutuzov) for players unhappy with the new changes. 

 

 

The classes most hit are those least resistant to damage-over-time with no way of healing back fires/floods, particularly cruisers and DDs. I raised the point of the DD - because these are particularly vulnerable to being hit hard and early on in the game - way before they can even contest a cap. 

I will stop playing my dds. As a dd main I will stop playing altogether or I will switch to CVs for a while. Anyway it will suck. If more ppl will leave they will see the mistake maybe. Unlikely. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
[SCRUB]
Players
1,386 posts
18,974 battles

it's simply coming as predicted and just been obvious. the rework did not solve anything, they just shifted the existing problems into a new setting and added a ton of new ones on top.

with a rework in rts this thing might would've been done within half a year. it gonna take ages before the new system is halfway balanced in whole (if even possible at all lol), while endangering the constitution of the game. as they admitted, it gonna take time on liveserver. and in that time this game gonna lose a lot of players.

the math may be: rework on live, may lose players, console iteration ready, get new players....

 

and with that formula they run in danger to lose what they have, just as not reaching their goal on aquiring new players. way to risky for my taste....

 

  • Cool 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[FL4-0]
Players
1,444 posts
7,328 battles

Minutaur AA is now completely useless. I hope they remodel the AA or give me the FXP of all the British CL.

It does not make any sense that the large caliber AA is now useless, it does not make any sense that AFT does not increase the range. Perhaps they did not realize that the British CL do not have DF?

 

And why can not I click on a squadron? Is it because you can not do it on the console? Are you seriously going to simplify EVERYTHING a PC game to facilitate a copy/paste of code to the console and vice versa?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[GOUF]
Beta Tester
261 posts
5,612 battles
31 minutes ago, DariusJacek said:

I will stop playing my dds. As a dd main I will stop playing altogether or I will switch to CVs for a while. Anyway it will suck. If more ppl will leave they will see the mistake maybe. Unlikely. 

 

This more or less.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
805 posts
8,491 battles
1 hour ago, DariusJacek said:

When every bb Kevin will start tp cry about bad CV and will stop buying staff WG will react. Probably by nerfing CVs so badly that nobody will play them. 

No, they will not complane. They will migrate do CV.

 

Back in the day when Arty in WoT was un-nerfed. I used do have different account where I only played Arty. If you where around then, you would know that Arty was extremly popular.

 

But pre-nerfed Arty in WoT was actually alot more difficult do play than "New" CV. I would even say that it was very hard, when compared do new CV gameplay (what is saying alot, because Arty used do be very easy do play for average player, it was hard do be Arty Unicum.)

 

In all intent-and-purpose the new CV gameplay is heavily dumbed-down arty gameplay.

 

Change will not change mutch for general issiuses. Good players will still be alot better than bad players, so skill cap will remain. But because they are now extremly easy do play, they will draw masses of bad players. They will still be bad, but because there is almost no depth do the CV gamplay anymore they still feel good.

 

Trying out the new CV was probably the dullest game experience I have had in my 25 years of gaming. Because you do not really do mutch, most of the thing are automatic, range is unlimited and planes are fast, so do not really need do worry about positioning. Squadrons are unlimited so loosing them is of no consorne. Even if you [edited]-up initial aiming, you can still fix it. Even survivablity is extremly high (being only class, that is very safe of enemy CV) and it is very hard for a DD or even cruiser do really tackel you when spoted.

 

Do translate it into ARTY in WoT, than "new" CV would be Arty with the armor of IS3, with unlimited range and ammo, with ability do fire guided munition. Absurd.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[THROW]
Players
658 posts
21,438 battles

You people asked for a rework. You'll get what you get and you have no right to moan. Oh and your AA heavy ships don't just obliterate our planes anymore so you want a refund? Excuse me whilst I fall off my chair laughing haha

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
440 posts
4,967 battles

Sad to see World of Warships become World of Warplanes II, the remake where the targets can be purchased or grinded by players.

 

And all they had to do was make AA work... Oh well... :cap_old:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[FL4-0]
Players
1,444 posts
7,328 battles
25 minutes ago, Mr_Snoww said:

You people asked for a rework. You'll get what you get and you have no right to moan. Oh and your AA heavy ships don't just obliterate our planes anymore so you want a refund? Excuse me whilst I fall off my chair laughing haha

We are talking about the AA rework. CV rework is absolutely necessary, every day the game reminds me that it is necessary. CVs rework can now be nerf and buff easily because one CV can not kill another in minute 2 of the game and will not distort the WR/damage the general stats server that are now completely false.

 

----

 

In order not to distort the thread, if the squadrons are infinite (for now), DFAA should have infinite loads and the AA should not be damaged during the game, at least with the appropriate modules or skill captain.

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[RONIN]
Beta Tester
3,004 posts
5,968 battles

I found AA to be better in the PTS (as compared to test 1/2/3) - my first game in a fuso (no AA skills taken, no catapult fighter, only AA equipment is the +2 bursts) I had 25 plane kills. That was against a tier 6 ranger and a tier 8 shok.

 

Similarly with pensacola I had 23 kills. (Against shok and ryujo).

 

The addition of the continuous damage for long/mid as well as the bursts adds up when there are several ships - I tried flying over whole fleets to see how long it would take for them to die. Reasonably quickly.

 

DF however isnt that great - because it just increases the damage of a burst, so it only helps if they hit one. Its therefore mostly useful on ships that have a large number of bursts (as the CV is more likely to hit one). It would be better IMO if it added more bursts to make it more likely to hit.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BLUMR]
Beta Tester
826 posts
7,787 battles

From my experience, the AA sectors are pointless for someone who is fighting. Sure, if no one is shooting at me, I can flip and turn to boost the damage of the AA but the moment someone looks at me I have to evade the shells, so it is better to leave the AA damage to the default 100/100.

 

Defensive AA seems to have had a very small portion of the balancing in regards to the rework. Duration and charges remain the same while the damage is severely decreased while adding a boost to flak damage.  AA ranges have been nerfed(tier 10 US/UK/RU Cruisers were the only ones I looked at) and AA range has been completely removed from skill tree and module selection.

 

As it stands they fixed(in my opinion) CVs but broke the AA.

 

If I have no guarantee that my AA when fully spec'd is going to make the sky near me a No-Fly zone, then I want my AA skill to be adequate enough to help me survive. At minimum DefAA should have a lower cooldown, say 80/60 and shorter effect say 20 seconds.  Flak is just as RNG fest as the Live AA, but the panic effect of DefAA is a constant and should be available much more often if we are going to see more CVs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BYOB]
Players
3,466 posts
12,389 battles
2 hours ago, iJoby said:

edited

Yes, yes they are. And they know it, but all that glue won't eat itself.

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-AP-]
Players
961 posts
3,070 battles

edited

 

aka censored by wargaming, i did not write a single swear word, it was just a highly critical post about the upcoming cv rework, so i can see this as nothing other than corporate censorship.

  • Cool 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
170 posts
7,460 battles

ok guys.. brace yourself HERE COMES THE JOKE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

- YueYang with RADAR

 

 

:cap_haloween::cap_haloween:

 

But seriously why in last episode of waterline they did not mention others ships almost at all in that cv rework? what does it mean to THEM ?! how can they imagine playing destroyer after rework ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
103 posts
4,313 battles
2 hours ago, Sargento_YO said:

As a matter of fact I did mentioned the Atlanta problem. And I have an Atlanta myself.

Apologies if you did already.

 

Most of the forum/reddit topics seem to centralise on the CVs themselves - the Waterline Video (which I hoped was kind of going to offer some sort of reassurance) just mentioned elements of the new AA. Nothing particularly reassuring anyway.

 

2 hours ago, iJoby said:

edited

 

I hope they do postpone it - if WG stick their hands up and say 'we'll release this later once it's better' I don't think anyone would complain. Nobody is holding them to a timetable that they must get new carriers out by X month in 2019 - I'd far rather they were released whenever they are ready, not rushed out before. The whole thing needs a lot more testing and the broken bits need a lot more fixing before it gets unleashed onto the live server. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BYOB]
Players
3,466 posts
12,389 battles
2 minutes ago, Gvozdika said:

I hope they do postpone it - if WG stick their hands up and say 'we'll release this later once it's better' I don't think anyone would complain. Nobody is holding them to a timetable that they must get new carriers out by X month in 2019 - I'd far rather they were released whenever they are ready, not rushed out before. The whole thing needs a lot more testing and the broken bits need a lot more fixing before it gets unleashed onto the live server. 

They can't postpone it, or at least they won't because of the internal schedule. they already committed themselves to a release, prepared an event and all the bells and whistles that go with it. If they postpone the release they will have a gaping hole in the calendar, with nothing going on. Instead they will press on with what they have, even if it damages the game and hurts the playerbase. I expect February to June to be one of the darkest periods for WoWS.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×