Jump to content
You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.
Leo_Apollo11

DevBlogWoWs: CV Changes and Roadmap

85 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[SCRUB]
Quality Poster
3,191 posts
9,000 battles

Hi all,

 

DevBlogWoWs: CV Changes and Roadmap

 

Quote

Dear players,

 

Today we will talk about the improvement of the new gameplay of aircraft carriers. As already noted, with such a big change in the game, it has been necessary to apply some corrections over a few updates, and now we will share our plans for the foreseeable future – up to 0.8.4.

 

Please remember that plans sometimes change: the information below is preliminary, the timeframe may move, and following your feedback and suggestions, some points may well be added a little later.

 

  1. Balance settings, general to specific. We are now at the stage of adjusting the balance between the classes and focussing on addressing specific issues (e.g. alternate torpedo Hakuryu to 0.8.0.1). The individual fine-tuning of the ships is out of the question for now. For example, first we need to find the optimal balance of air defense and aircraft losses at each tier, and then, if individual aircraft carriers lose too many aircraft, we can individually increase the survivability (or, if the air defense of individual ships is too weak, it can be strengthened). In addition, it should be understood that the gameplay has changed greatly, and players are still learning and adapting. Statistics of the combat effectiveness of CVs and other ships on the part of air defense is changing literally every day and only after some time will it stabilize. Therefore, it should take at least a few days after each balance change before making preliminary conclusions.

  2. Some changes will affect the mechanics of constant air defense damage. As we said earlier, the number of explosions that appear in the path of the squadron is limited, which on the one hand still leaves the AA of ships strong enough but at the same time gives a chance to the planes to survive and not to see just a wall of "black" sky in front of them (read more here: https://medium.com/@devblogwows/aa-article-107c18eac84) Constant damage from a couple of ships is simply added up, resulting in excessive efficiency of any group of ships (given that flak now gives more air defense breaks). To solve this problem, we implemented a nonlinear addition of constant damage. Overlapping air defense zones will still be effective, but the squadron will have more chance to keep aircraft. If the squadron gets into the zone of action of the same two groups of guns with permanent damage 600, the total damage is equal to 960 and not 1200. Hit three zones, 1260, not 1800.

  3. To solve the problem of "F-spam" (when the player, after an attack, could recall a squadron even under heavy air defense fire with impunity), we significantly increased the period of vulnerability of aircraft (specifically the climb) when returning. Now recalling a squadron to the aircraft carrier should be done only after leaving the zone of air defense, otherwise losses are inevitable. The same mechanics currently affect aircraft that have just carried out an attack - they need to gain the same altitude before they become invulnerable. Taken together, the problem of F-spam was solved, but, as many rightly noted, the loss of aircraft after attacking increased. To mitigate this, we will reduce the invulnerability ceiling for aircraft that have carried out an attack, but the squadron that a player returns using F-Key will still return via the higher altitude. This will soften the exit from the battle for the planes, but at the same time to avoid the return the "F-spam" exploit. Taking into account the new mechanics of calculating the damage of intersecting zones, significant changes in this area may not occur if other changes sufficiently affect the survival of aircraft.

  4. We received proposals to take into account the damage to aircraft in the combat economy, so that any contribution to the air defense team was evaluated. The plan is to add damage inflicted to aircraft on the battle results screen, and in the calculation of economic rewards, but it will be added a little later, when statistics have stabilized.

  5. The priority air defense sector interface, as well as the information regarding plane readiness on the deck of the CV will be reworked for more convenience and clarity.

  6. We agree with the popular opinion that aircraft carriers have excessive capabilities to spot enemy ships, especially at the start of the battle. Work on a solution of the situation is already underway, and we will share information on progress in future publications. In addition, the action of the skill "Radio Location" will be disabled for aircraft by popular request.

  7. The same can be said about the interaction of aircraft carriers and destroyers – the search for opportunities to mitigate the unpleasant scenario in which the aircraft carrier can effectively shutdown a destroyer with exhaustive attacks are already underway. We're testing changes to the settings of the Attack Aircraft and other potential improvements. There are chances that radical solutions will not be required, since the problems with the scenario described above play a serious role in the confrontation of the "Destroyer – Aircraft Carrier".

  8. After collecting your comments, we will try to modify the autopilot, so that its operation is more predictable, and more convenient and reliable to use.

Once again, this is a preliminary and possibly incomplete list, and these changes are planned to be implemented by the 0.8.4 update. We will continue to inform you about our plans and future changes. Thank you for playing, your feedback, suggestions, and above all – for your concern.

 

Good Luck and Fair Seas!

 

Source (Reddit): "CV Changes and Roadmap"

 

 

Leo "Apollo11"

  • Cool 8
  • Funny 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Quality Poster
3,191 posts
9,000 battles

Hi all,

 

1 minute ago, Klopirat said:

 

 

I know... but how many people go there... :Smile_hiding:

 

 

Leo "Apollo11"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[THROW]
Players
579 posts
21,154 battles
27 minutes ago, Leo_Apollo11 said:

After collecting your comments, we will try to modify the autopilot, so that its operation is more predictable, and more convenient and reliable to use.

omg would they stop being so stubborn and add hull control back....

  • Cool 3
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[GBONM]
Players
260 posts
5,205 battles

Amazing changes on the way! Let's hope everyone will be satisfied with this!

 

(Except for delete CV crowd)

  • Funny 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ANV]
[ANV]
Players
220 posts
3,004 battles

Think I've played one DD random game since the patch. Not a fun experience, so I'm glad they're addressing it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[FDUSH]
Players
1,194 posts
6,749 battles

That rebalance sucks, still nothing about controlling the carrier while the planes are on the air.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ANV]
[ANV]
Players
220 posts
3,004 battles
19 minutes ago, Mr_Snoww said:

omg would they stop being so stubborn and add hull control back....

Agree. They could at least make it an option. e.g.

 

 ☑Use manual CV hull control

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TTT]
Players
4,113 posts
7,848 battles

what has me really worried here is that to me this sounds like (and that may of course be completely wrong) these are all (or most) of the "major" changes they see as necessary all the way until 0.8.4, which should be sometime mid May. To me, those fixes are necessary and good in their own right, but they aren't nearly all that'd be required to make the rework good overall.

That's a list of planned "urgent" changes I'd have wanted for 0.8.1, or 0.8.2 at the very outside, to make the game more enjoyable again - with a LOT more for 0.8.3 and 0.8.4 to make the rework actually worth the effort.

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[OGHF]
Players
674 posts
11,824 battles

Pleased about the removal of the Radio Detection from the planes, will let DD do there job.

@MrConway but I would like to see manual air defence back rather than 1 side or the other defence zone, it is ok for a BB but totally useless for a DD trying to avoid rocket planes as the planes are moving from 1 side  of the ship to the other as you take avoiding action and you need your AA to follow the attacking  planes.

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Players
7,716 posts
9,928 battles
1 minute ago, Tyrendian89 said:

what has me really worried here is that to me this sounds like (and that may of course be completely wrong) these are all (or most) of the "major" changes they see as necessary all the way until 0.8.4, which should be sometime mid May. To me, those fixes are necessary and good in their own right, but they aren't nearly all that'd be required to make the rework good overall.

That's a list of planned "urgent" changes I'd have wanted for 0.8.1, or 0.8.2 at the very outside, to make the game more enjoyable again - with a LOT more for 0.8.3 and 0.8.4 to make the rework actually worth the effort.

I presume most of them are on the hot list and the only longterm points are the excessive spotting and anti-DD efficacy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ANV]
[ANV]
Players
220 posts
3,004 battles

They need to remove the "spotted" (six sense?) skill for planes too. With their speed it's way to powerful.

  • Cool 4
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
153 posts
8,719 battles

I do not see reason why two auras will have less damage than straight up addition.

That will make blobing less effective, but no one will know about it as they do not read patch notes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TTT]
Players
4,113 posts
7,848 battles
3 minutes ago, Aotearas said:

I presume most of them are on the hot list and the only longterm points are the excessive spotting and anti-DD efficacy.

yeah that's what I'm hoping for as well - again, that complaint was just the impression I got from reading their post, I'm fully aware that those kinds of impressions can be very wrong :Smile_Default:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[MIAU]
[MIAU]
Players
2,664 posts
58 minutes ago, Leo_Apollo11 said:

I know... but how many people go there... :Smile_hiding:

While I am always trying to be helpfull when asked, I don't feel the need to support those who don't bother to look at a subforum only one click away.

Everyone is responsible for themself. If they are unwilling to look at the Devblog forum every once in a while then they deserve to stay uninformed until they ask.

Instead of creating a new thread I'd at best copy this into the "Some interesting info..." thread.

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Players
7,716 posts
9,928 battles
5 minutes ago, Sir_Grzegorz said:

I do not see reason why two auras will have less damage than straight up addition.

That will make blobing less effective, but no one will know about it as they do not read patch notes.

 

Not by much. The usual blobbing I see now would stack so much continuous dps (nevermind flak bursts) even with non-linear returns they'd melt aircraft before most CVs could even get their first attack in. And the example numbers WG gave are rather on the low end, at least for hightier AA. Something like a Des Moines/Worcester/Minotaur has ~1k continuous dps in its midrange sector and that is already pretty scary on its own even for tier X CVs. Add one or two other ships worth of dps to that mix and it's still as much a no-fly zone as it was before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[OCTO]
Players
819 posts
16,121 battles

Very curios to see how can they address CV/DD  interaction....

 

P.S. Where are all CV rework defenders who were saying that CV/DD interaction is OK and that all we have to do is adapt? 

 

P.P.S.  Funny that most of them (except our resident "reply to each topic multiple times" ColonelPete) have either hidden or deep red stats....  And don't play DDs.

  • Cool 2
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[MIAU]
[MIAU]
Players
2,664 posts
20 minutes ago, Zen71_sniper said:

Very curios to see how can they address CV/DD  interaction....

 

P.S. Where are all CV rework defenders who were saying that CV/DD interaction is OK and that all we have to do is adapt? 

 

P.P.S.  Funny that most of them (except our resident "reply to each topic multiple times" ColonelPete) have either hidden or deep red stats....  And don't play DDs.

Some of us simply adepted and don't bother to reply to any thread claiming that this is impossible.

(But you'll probably say I have deep red stats too, as I am hiding my stats from people like you.)

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[GBONM]
Players
260 posts
5,205 battles
Vor 17 Minuten, Zen71_sniper sagte:

Very curios to see how can they address CV/DD  interaction....

 

P.S. Where are all CV rework defenders who were saying that CV/DD interaction is OK and that all we have to do is adapt? 

 

P.P.S.  Funny that most of them (except our resident "reply to each topic multiple times" ColonelPete) have either hidden or deep red stats....  And don't play DDs.

I'm here and happy with the news,i think the current interaction is also fine. I'm happy either ways ;)

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[UNICS]
Beta Tester
4,564 posts
8,261 battles
26 minutes ago, Zen71_sniper said:

Very curios to see how can they address CV/DD  interaction....

 

P.S. Where are all CV rework defenders who were saying that CV/DD interaction is OK and that all we have to do is adapt? 

 

P.P.S.  Funny that most of them (except our resident "reply to each topic multiple times" ColonelPete) have either hidden or deep red stats....  And don't play DDs.

I think there's a lot that can be made to alleviate the issue of CV-DD interaction, but almost 100% of DDs I run into when playing CV still play exactly the same way they did pre-rework. I don't even have RL on my CV captains and I can with almost perfect accuracy find DDs at any point in the battle because they still play as if I'm not around and go alone to the usual places.

Not saying there's no issue and they just need to L2P, but most aren't even trying.

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
900 posts
245 battles

Im wondering how they will actually balance out cv/dd interactions unless they give dd’s dfaa but better than most or make cv’s unable to spot them them or at least spot them at long distances i guess.

 

thats pretty tricky. I was hoping they would also address fighters to make them more effective but i guess patience is a virtue.

 

good luck to balancing team with trying to solve the cv/dd issue even if they poured their heart and soul into i dont see that getting resolved anytime soon. (Might regret that statement lol).

 

either way a good list of changes so far and im glad they are addressing the spotting as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[GWDYS]
Players
371 posts
2,949 battles
56 minutes ago, Zen71_sniper said:

Very curios to see how can they address CV/DD  interaction....

 

P.S. Where are all CV rework defenders who were saying that CV/DD interaction is OK and that all we have to do is adapt? 

 

P.P.S.  Funny that most of them (except our resident "reply to each topic multiple times" ColonelPete) have either hidden or deep red stats....  And don't play DDs.

Iam here bud :)

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[JR-IT]
Alpha Tester
845 posts
7,412 battles

I lije all the proposed changed but one: 

the aa stacking. They are working on the opposite direction in witch Imho the should:

They should nerf the aa value of all the ships to be more or less 60% of what they are now, for all ships ( but dds) but leave the stacking as it is right now. In this way you don't  have, like now, ships that are simply immune to cvs ( hello mino) but at the same time getting closer toghether rewards you with increased protection 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×