Test Server Changes Have Gone Live - Is it any Better?

[Gvozdika]

…..Erm no. After my earlier issues with the rework and specifically the AA-CV interaction (or lack of it) I wanted to see if things were any better.

 

I mainly went out in the Montana, Worcester and Midway to see what had changed from Round 1 to Round 2. I didn't go in any other ships - just the ones I'd previously used a fair bit in the different test phases.

 

As a rule, I generally aimed to play as aggressively and gung-ho as possible in the CV - gunning for enemy AA cruisers and AA-strong BBs like the Republique at every opportunity. On the other hand, I would play very cautiously and passively in the surface ships - sticking close to friendly AA where possible, throwing the ship around as much as I could to throw off a CV attack's aim, etc. Here's what I've found.

 

SURFACE SHIP EXPERIENCE... oh dear

 

1) Long-mid AA is stronger....IF it hits. I definitely knocked down around a dozen planes per match in the Worc and Montana - which is about four/five times more than the first PTS. However the basic issue remains.

 

We run into a core problem with the rework AA - you can just drive around it. It really is as simple as it sounds. Anyone stupid enough to fly headfirst into flak clouds deserves to lose planes. Everyone else, just fly around it and immediately you negate 90% of the damage output of an enemy ship's AA defence suite. I noticed this both as a surface ship and as a CV player trying to attack said surface ship.

 

2) DFAA STILL doesn't seem to do anything? Not sure if it's a bug or just a simple lack of feedback - but my Worcester's AA seemed no different with DFAA engaged as it was without. I mean it was useless before and it's much the same now - so I suppose at least it hasn't gotten worse... The CV player gets no inkling that his/her planes are being hit any harder than usual by DFAA - it doesn't seem too different whichever side you're playing on.

 

3) Sector mechanic is pointless due to the speed planes move and the fact that most attacking flights will strike you and fly OVER your ship to the other (less defended) side. I suggest replacing the sector command with something more useful - like the option to play mournful music (Titanic theme for example) as your AA cruiser gets wrecked by planes. Other alternatives are available. On a serious note - it's a gimmick that doesn't really offer any noticeable benefit to you as the defending player - on a larger ship it just makes sense to ignore the thing entirely and keep all AA equally useless on both sides of the ship.

 

4) 2 v 2 CV games are pure hell. I don't really need to elaborate - suffice to say that your entire game feels like it is spent running away from planes. 3 v 3 CVs were not a pleasure I experienced - but I can't imagine it would be any more fun.

 

CV EXPERIENCE...aka Farming Simulator

 

1) Carrier play remains the most mind-numbingly repetitive rinse-and-repeat process going. Do you get nice big damage numbers for little effort? Yes. Is it hard to do so? No. The purpose of a rework CV is to farm damage in ludicrous quantities - that's it. There really isn't much more to it than that - since countering a CV is now close to impossible and the option of supporting actions to help your team are non-existent.

 

2) Planes recycle quick enough to always have striking power ready. Losing planes still has no downsides - besides perhaps having to occasionally press a different button when it came to lobbing out another strike squadron. Bearing in mind I was sometimes being a berk on purpose and losing planes by yolo-ing AA cruisers - I NEVER found my Midway unable to form a full attack flight. I always seemed to have a plentiful supply of rocket planes (see below). So the stronger, effective AA (which it isn't if you drive around it) still has no real bite to your strike ability as the game plays out. 

 

3) USN rockets really are a whole new level of idiocy. They seem even stronger now? With a flight of Bearcats and the ability to aim - you can pretty much tackle anything. DDs? Sprinkle HVARs on the poor sods and knock out modules aplenty. 3000 damage per attack run is perfectly achievable on an actively dodging DD-sized target. Hammer the superstructures of Cruisers and BBs - you get the added bonus of more damage, a few fires here and there combined with AA modules being decimated on top of that. I did 100K+ using just HVARs in most games. 

 

4) Fighters are really, really, really, pointless. No change from PTS Round 1 - however this time I tried using them defensively over friendly ships to try and 'catch' incoming enemy air. In reality they are just too slow and dim-witted to attack enemy squadrons BEFORE they've dropped all of their ordnance on their target. Most enemy CV players kind of just flew around them anyway and I avoided most enemy fighter groups myself. We've got to the point where the opposing CV players can just flat-out ignore each other and go for surface ships all game.

 

5) AA is still no deterrence. As a CV player - you now have no targets that you cannot take down. AA Cruisers are no more capable than other cruisers - their reliance on long-range flak (of the 'drive around it' variety) is ironically their weakness. DDs can't do anything. USN BBs make lots of flak but fly beyond that and you don't really find yourself losing much HP. You really do have no incentive to plan your attack and select your targets in the way that an RTS CV has to now. 

 

-TLDR-

 

So my conclusions are as follows - the CV rework is possibly the worst change to this game since it left Beta. It appears that every change up to this point from the various test phases to the most recent patch on PTS is just window dressing.  The problems are everything to with the CORE of the rework - not just a few damage numbers tweaking up or down. I appreciate WG want to make the CV class more accessible, more fun and likely get more people playing it. However I think they've got it wrong. The rework will be unique in that it will antagonise everybody, whatever you currently enjoy sailing around in. 

 

CV players who currently know their craft will be treated to this new point-and-click adventure game without depth, strategy or finesse. Just fly around and bomb everything - nothing is going to fight back... not even the opposing CV can do anything to you. New players are likely to lose the will to live after a few hundred games grinding the new CVs - it will probably be more enthralling to visit the Dentist and have a few teeth extracted with some mole-grips. 

 

Surface ship players will basically enjoy being targets all game, every game. The CV will be the most powerful unit on anyone's team - everything else just serves to be rocketed/bombed/torped/immolated/flooded by the opposing CV(s). Because that sounds incredibly fun and entertaining doesn't it?

 

If that's the 'vision' that WG have for WOWS - I'm out of here.*

 

 

*I don't often post on this forum but the rework was enough of an issue to make me want to. This will be my last post on the subject, since I feel that this is all going to hit the live server whatever the player feedback tells them to the contrary. Now if you don't mind, I'm going to enjoy my last week or two of WOWS before 0.8.0 - I think I need to find another game to scratch that 'drive big stuff and make pretty explosions' itch in the meantime... 

 

 

 

 

[Verblonde]

Thanks for the update OP; as a matter of interest, does this view concur with that of other experienced players who have given this latest iteration a run-out?

[Gvozdika]

3 minutes ago, Verblonde said:

Thanks for the update OP; as a matter of interest, does this view concur with that of other experienced players who have given this latest iteration a run-out?

 

I can't speak for anyone else - but many of the underlying issues that affected the first test are still present. The overall consensus over the first round was negative from most people in the know, including the devs who actually stated that the AA wasn't even working properly in the first test. This latest iteration has the buffed AA and presumably the buffed AA mount HP.

 

 

[22cm]

How idiotic can WG be?!

Do they really think they can afford to lose players at this moment because of their carrier idiocy?!

Do they really think that the players they will lose now will ever come back?!

Fuking unbelievable...

[mariouus]

2 hours ago, Gvozdika said:

3) Sector mechanic is pointless due to the speed planes move and the fact that most attacking flights will strike you and fly OVER your ship to the other (less defended) side. I suggest replacing the sector command with something more useful - like the option to play mournful music (Titanic theme for example) as your AA cruiser gets wrecked by planes. Other alternatives are available. On a serious note - it's a gimmick that doesn't really offer any noticeable benefit to you as the defending player - on a larger ship it just makes sense to ignore the thing entirely and keep all AA equally useless on both sides of the ship.

 

It is pointless. In both conseptually and mathematically. It somewhat works, if team forms a full-team blob (and even then, not really). But if you are attacked, enemy a/c spend more time in your less defended side.

 

Mathematically speaking, you have more DPM against enemy a/c when you are NOT using it.

[ClappingLollies]

Ive been testing the new CV's a bit and i feel like they are super OP when top/equal tier. But when you are bottom tier you will struggle a bit (saying that i did over 120k dmg most of the games where i was bottom tier) when you have a Shokaku vs T10 AA you will lose a lot of planes. Had a Mino that we had to go for earlier. He shot down 115 planes between the two CV's on our team. You land a torp here and there, some bombs and the rockets just tickle them. But, against T6 you just toy with them. Farming floodings in fires all over. Losing very few planes. 

 

Very good balancing WG. GJ. 

 

Spoiler

#Sarcasm

 

[Spellfire40]

On 1/11/2019 at 8:43 PM, Gvozdika said:

 

I can't speak for anyone else - but many of the underlying issues that affected the first test are still present. The overall consensus over the first round was negative from most people in the know, including the devs who actually stated that the AA wasn't even working properly in the first test. This latest iteration has the buffed AA and presumably the buffed AA mount HP.

 

 

can you defend agist a CV drop? Every replay i saw the CV didnt lost any planes during the 1st atack of a wave. especally for dds thats meanes they can do crap if tehy are targeted but now teh cv will never run out of planes.......and from teh cv side i heared most players are not found of an automated system that decides on their consumable usage........CVs are NOT ready to go on live server and that dont even toches teh question of prem CVs of wich 2 are in a tir that no longer exists for CVs.....

[Amon_ITA]

Thanks for the feedback OP.

 

That sound worrisome to say the least.

 

One could argue that they are making CV so overpowered on purpose to make everyone play them.

 

In my opinion every choice that makes the skill of a single individual preponderant in deciding the outcome of a match is utterly wrong, expecially when it’s related to the class he’s playing.

 

Lets hope this situation will not make it on the live servers.

[Bear__Necessities]

On 1/11/2019 at 8:21 PM, 22cm said:

How idiotic can WG be?!

Sir Foch gate and Graff Zepplin gate. That’s all that needs to be said.

[thiextar]

Wargaming need to go back to the drawing board with the cv rework. This system will never work, because it is far too oversimplified.

[El2aZeR]

On 1/11/2019 at 7:45 PM, Gvozdika said:

2 v 2 CV games are pure hell.

 

I dunno, it is the most teamplay in randoms I have experienced ever since OBT ended. I found 2vs2 CV games quite fun tbh.

Spoiler

 

 

 

[Starchy_Tuber]

AA of t10 ships seems improved... see images... but you cannot stop an attack, you just whittle away at the aircraft numbers slowly, and they eventually add up to a lot of aircraft, but the number you kill is somewhat meaningless.

The *only* reason I stopped shooting down aircraft was by having to go and kill both of the CVs...that was the only way to stay alive...otherwise, they just wear you down no matter how good or bad the player is.

Changing your AA focus from side to side - tbph I find this utterly pointless as the best way to avoid repeat drops is wild manoeuvring - which means aircraft rarely sit on one side of you for you to shoot at....sometiems on map border, or against an island, maybe, otherwise its a waste of time imo.

Long-range with AA consumable is most effective - however, that "effectiveness" comes with a BIG caveat that it depends on whether or not the CV (Airplane) player drives into the flak bubbles or not... outside fo the flak bubbles damage to aircraft is not great and really just a mediocre DoT - what it really does is take a "Potential 4- attack run squadron" and turns it into a 3, or at best 2-run squadron.

You won't stop air attacks.

I enjoyed Tier 4 CV play and it felt balanced even with 2 CVs per team - thing is - its almost all versus bots on test... very few players in games other than the opposing CVs.
Tier X - Im a CV n00b, total nugget... but even I can torp a ship reliably - i always get one run out of a squadron even If I frak it up or act suicidally... the planes are throw-away after all.
Bombs are trickier but, other than DDs, easy-ish to land hits (again BOTS! warning, ships didn't manoeuvre much)
DDs and rockets - you can do this all day long even versus players, you just hound them over and over even if you don't kill them quickly, feels a bit like cyber-bullying tbph... especially if you team-up with the other CV>

3 CVs per side per game? seriously? No. (Unless you want to hear the sheep screaming)

Overall impression: showing promise, (Tier 4 was fun with torps!) totally not ready for release yet and the current Test environment bears no resemblance to the live gaming scene; so using it as a testbed is questionable at best.

Disclaimer: I don't play CVs on Live!

Note: 274 aircraft were shot down in that game.

Note: 274 aircraft were shot down in that game.

[Teogr8]

So from what im reading here and all over the internet about the cv rework it will a total disaster.My opinion, remove cvs and get done with it or u can make cvs like thunderstorm or cyclone controlled by a bot.I love the game and i dont want to be deleted by my hard drive.

[SexyCroat]

i dont get it, people cried that cvs were op up untill now couse they can oneshot ships, now everyone cries that cvs are op again but now they need 4 runs to kill a ship... what did you expect wg to do? remove them? lol yeah right aint gonna happen... CV is OP for a reason it takes skill and time to learn although this seems very low iq compatible play for new cvs but still current saipan is for braindead monkey and yet alot still frak it up somehow..

[Capra76]

9 hours ago, antenociti said:

AA of t10 ships seems improved... see images... but you cannot stop an attack,

 

If multiple T10 can stack their AA it becomes effective and can stop an attack, but how realistic that is on live I don't know.

[22cm]

5 minutes ago, Capra76 said:

 

If multiple T10 can stack their AA it becomes effective and can stop an attack, but how realistic that is on live I don't know.

At the launch of the game, the CVs were OP as fukc, so the only chance for a ship to stop CV attack was to stay very close together with the other ships, in a single big tight group. Looks like a comeback to me.

[Ferry_25]

Very nice post OP. I'm finding it harder not to form an opinion before the patch hits. I do feel getting more and more pessimistic. My problem is the too dominant role of the CV. Yes it's realistic seeing the naval change IRL when the carriers got foothold. The rest of the surface fleet is there to support the CV('s). Seeing the things now and later ingame the only solution seem to pack the fleet around the CV and hunt the other. As realistic as this might sound and even could be awesome to play it's not realistic to expect that kind of coordination with this playerbase in randoms.

 

As it seems now I have no intention at all to serve as a XP/ credit pinata for CV elitists. I think I'll try out one or 2 matches with a CV in coop just to see how it's working. After that I think I'll be totally bored with that gameplay. Even if it's looking beyond stunningly awesome graphically. Otherwise either play CV free matches: T2 can be a blast to play occasionally, certain operations and CW.

 

However twisted and turned for me the CV has a too dominant role. I don't see any way to "balance" that out ingame. Bleak as it might sound I'm not ruling out the possibility me eventually stating "it's them or me gone." Yes: give me your worst shot "don't bang the door" haters. I do know it'd be painful. Wows has been my hobby since I discovered it in 2015. All games eventually has bored me out. But I'm not even close to that point. This'd be the first game which I would leave by some unplayable abomination just to please a small % of the PB and polishing ego for a mistake from the get-go, as I see it.

 

tl;dr My advice: just take the hard call and remove the CV entirely from wows. Certain operations excepted perhaps. Just let players fight it out with ship to ship combat.

[EgyptOverseer]

One thing especially hard for me to understand is why attack systems that are aimed and shot by an AI are treated differently by WG. As an example, they have no issue making PvE bots have ridiculous accuracy, but when it comes to AA (live or PTS) it's always clearly dialled down to absurd levels. It literally feels like AA gunners only battle after a very large meal with enough alcohol to reach a comatose state. Meanwhile, in PvE I see the worst accuracy ship I have ever played (Myogi) reliably scoring citadels on enemies 10Km away. Move into PTS and a hundred AA gunners struggle to hit a single plane, whether they are in a set formation of 12 or in a formation of 3 flying in a straight line towards you. There is a reason plane attack runs in WW2 from IJN turned from repeat attacks to willing suicide runs...