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

CV 8.0 - were we spoiled by the lack of CV's earlier?

12 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[B0TS]
Beta Tester
1,800 posts
6,860 battles

Obviously played a few non-CV games last night after work and was getting quite worked up by the constant effort involved in fighting off aircraft 'constantly' and was thinking 'sheesh', this is a mess of a revamp. But actually, on reflection, is it....

 

In the RTS version, if a CV was 'going for you' you had multiple squadrons floating about the map constantly spotting and sometimes attacking

Current version, a CV has 1 active squadron (plus fighters) each. If that squadron was elsewhere on the map, then you were free'er than historically because you knew that there were no other squadrons around.

 

In the RTS version, if you were spotted by a CV then unless you were a strong AA ship there was not a lot you could do about it and they could spot multiple targets

Current version, if you were spotted by a CV then unless you are a strong AA ship there is not a lot you can do. No change.

 

In the RTS version, if a CV attacked you then generally you were stuffed unless you were a strong AA ship or had one close by to panic the attack. WASD worked.

Current version,  the attack squadrons do less individual damage per attack but can repeat attack much more quickly providing their aircraft survive (rockets against DDs to one side). WASD still works, but more difficult due to sequential attacks.

 

In the RTS version, high tier CV's were a rarity due to the complexity of performing well (I couldn't do it, so hats off to those who could multitask and micro manage to that degree)

In the current version, CV's are everywhere, 1, 2 per game (didn't encounter 3 last night). And I think that this is the root of a lot of the antipathy to the new release.

 

We have become accustomed to the rarity of CV's (mainly in T8+) that having them constantly in the game is a thought changing meta because we have to adapt to this new presence, old tactics will have to change purely because of the numbers being changed. But is it as fundamental as the changes we made when we did actually encounter a CV under the old system. It's just more frequent so more noticeable, and we are all subject to resistant to change, to varying degrees?

 

I played 6 battles last night to test the changes; 2 Mino (smoke, changed out from radar), 1 Kitakaze, 1 Neptune, 1 Atlanta, 1 Kidd, 4 wins, 2 losses, fairly decent numbers of aircraft shot down in all of them. I part specced all for AA (so not as fully AA as could be). All those are strong AA ships so perhaps my view is skewed by that, but... The most noticeable thing about all the battles was the constant 'watching over my shoulder' for attacking aircraft, constantly thinking about how I could assist my team mates and cursing the AA zone controlling interface (swapped from 'O' to 'space' for ease of use). And because it was 'new' it became a pain, until my brain thought about it more.

 

I'll try more games now that the weekend is here and also attempt some CV games to get the other side (did some on PTS but not enough with the current iteration). But the above is my initial feedback, for what it is worth :) 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
3,233 posts
11,415 battles

Every man and his dog picked AA heavy cruisers/Battleships last night or when crazy with AA perks. 

 

That can not last forever.   Is reducing the tankness of a Yam for instance (no FP, SI or HA) worth it? Not when people start complaining about being burned down twice as quick.  Or being torps as they are using defensive AA instead of Hydro?

 

Plus it's CV crazy at the moment.  When it settles down and people get bored very quick of the gamplay, you will less and less CV.  So speccing AA for only one CV is worth it?

 

Maybe, maybe not.

 

I wanna see the players numbers at the end of all this.  The biggest question is has WG brought more people into the game, kept the numbers the same or losing them hand over fist? They did this rework so they could make more money and bring more players into the game.  The question is, did it work? It's a massive gamble. 

 

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,054 posts
5,362 battles

I agree and expect the CV numbers to drop off as the novelty wears off. The changes to gameplay aren't limited to the CVs, AAA is something to get used to and at least the sector choice is slightly more engaging than hitting DFAA and hoping the increased spread will reduce the number of hits you're going to take.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[THESO]
Players
850 posts
3 minutes ago, Strappster said:

I agree and expect the CV numbers to drop off as the novelty wears off. The changes to gameplay aren't limited to the CVs, AAA is something to get used to and at least the sector choice is slightly more engaging than hitting DFAA and hoping the increased spread will reduce the number of hits you're going to take.

Sector selecting is the same as clicking ctrl on planes tbh

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
12 posts
8,806 battles

If you have two cv's that is two flights going out... which fight and then split up so it is four half flights coming back... plus the next two coming out from each CV. So this is a potential of 8 (due to time taking to return) damn spotters flying all over the map making it impossible to use concealment.

 

If you like DD's and cruisers... forget trying to be clever and do what you are supposed to do... just go for a 20km shimmy and use that as it is your only chance atm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[B0TS]
Beta Tester
1,800 posts
6,860 battles
2 minutes ago, Sub_Littoral said:

If you like DD's and cruisers... forget trying to be clever and do what you are supposed to do... just go for a 20km shimmy and use that as it is your only chance atm.

That was all I played last night and I didn't find that at all - biggest change was the increased spotting range for my CA's as I was totally used to 8.9 being the magical number for my Mino'....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NIKE]
Beta Tester
3,398 posts
7,298 battles
3 minutes ago, Sub_Littoral said:

If you have two cv's that is two flights going out... which fight and then split up so it is four half flights coming back... plus the next two coming out from each CV. So this is a potential of 8 (due to time taking to return) damn spotters flying all over the map making it impossible to use concealment.

 

If you like DD's and cruisers... forget trying to be clever and do what you are supposed to do... just go for a 20km shimmy and use that as it is your only chance atm.

As far as Im aware the returning planes "fly high" and are no longer visible to surface ships, no longer get attacked by AA and no longer spot.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[THESO]
Players
850 posts
6 minutes ago, Winged_Cat_Dormant said:

Sector selecting is not the same as clicking ctrl on planes. 

It takes about the same focus

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
870 posts
10,339 battles
2 minutes ago, Asakka said:

It takes about the same focus

Perhaps, but I still find it distracting and if the incoming planes change direction you have to set it again or turn, with the click on you automatically track it.

It adds one more level of complexity, you manually having to adjust it.

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
Beta Tester
1,861 posts
17,918 battles
15 minutes ago, Winged_Cat_Dormant said:

Sector selecting is not the same as clicking ctrl on planes. 

Exactly. Did not select a sector once yesterday because e.g. the +25% -25% shift for BB is not worth my attention, especially when many planes pass overhead anyway (so what you gain in the strong sector you will lose in the weak sector).

 

Apart from that I guess the spotting is now more prominent because the total attack time of the CV increase due to the multiple runs (of course not counting CV parking a FTR on your head in the old system).

 

Before you had to endure up to 6 squads for like 30 seconds and if you survived you were safe for like 2min (from the CV and his teammates if unspotted by then). Now that one squad will attack you and keep you spotted for ~3 runs or ~90 secs. And that is a lot of additinonal pain from the enemy surface fleet.

 

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TOXIC]
Players
4,794 posts
12,260 battles
46 minutes ago, Redcap375 said:

Every man and his dog picked AA heavy cruisers/Battleships last night or when crazy with AA perks. 

 

That can not last forever.   Is reducing the tankness of a Yam for instance (no FP, SI or HA) worth it? Not when people start complaining about being burned down twice as quick.  Or being torps as they are using defensive AA instead of Hydro? 

Wait, actually - can't it?

The reason why normally only madmen pick AA-heavy builds is because CVs were so scarce. At high tiers you encountered CVs in one battle out of three at best and even then there was a chance that they are so unequal in skill that either the enemy CV gets neutralized by your own or has the opposite is true and the match ends up a nigh-guaranteed loss whether you build AA or not. By picking "reduced tankiness of a Yam" you were behind because you were building countermeasures against a threat that just wasn't there most of the time. Building tankiness was the standard and picking anything else was "reduced tankiness" - with AA, specifically, being a "mad prepper" kind of build where you unnecessarily spend resources (module slots, captain perks) on something that rarely comes into play and when it does - rarely is crucial.

 

But let's assume that CVs are here to stay. Not in the launch day numbers, of course, but enough that a match without a CV is rare. In this case taking tanky low-AA build might end up not being the standard anymore - it's a trade-off. You seem to be assuming that people will go back to the old meta despite the changed environment - and that doesn't seem likely. If CVs remain a constant threat, AA skills won't be a rarely useful gimmick anymore.

 

But, as you yourself say...

1 hour ago, Redcap375 said:

Plus it's CV crazy at the moment.  When it settles down and people get bored very quick of the gamplay, you will less and less CV.

Currently we are at the "oooh shiny new thingy" stage. Everybody and their pet hamster is playing them and it's impossible to predict at what numbers the CV population is going to stabilize and how dangerous they're going to be once we weed out the "overall good at adapting but not fans of CVs in the long run" and "complete potatos that treat flak bursts as collectibles and get frustrated over not being able to do anything" players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×