Update 0.8.0.3

[hgbn_dk]

3 minutes ago, ForlornSailor said:

 

YOU stomped Into a discussion between 2 people. YOU can NOT change the subject. Either you contribute to what has been said or you SHHHH. ffs millennials. PS: You even look more stupid now.

Or you just want to be always right and better knowing... Yeah right think what you will I don't care

 

Dosen't change the fact of Stealth AA cruiser tomorrow and this discussion is about the changes for tomorrow

[DFens_666]

3 minutes ago, hgbn_dk said:

I have been talking about tomorrow and in the future the whole time, not today..

 

You quoted Forlornsailor, who was correcting someone about CURRENT AA mechanics. Ive told you 3 times now.

Can you please understand that SOMEONE ELSE said, that Neptune and Mino have Stealth AA at this moment....

I even agreed several times with you now, that it will be different tomorrow. But there are people spreading lies about how AA works right now.

[ForlornSailor]

3 minutes ago, hgbn_dk said:

Or you just want to be always right and better knowing...

 

its easy to be right when you make it so easy to be right :) I wasnt so thick to claim that ships with 7.3 km air detection can use stealth AA whilst having an AA-range of 6,9 km. That was all you Buddy. And the other guy. You dont want to look stupid? Dont make stupid claims. And then cry when people call you out. How hard is that?

 

3 minutes ago, hgbn_dk said:

Yeah right think what you will I don't care 

Thats why you kept spamming. Cuz you dont care. Right.

[Hallleron]

And I just want the Alaska ... 

[Rockety666]

Midway was that powerful? that sort of damage reduction seems a lot...

[Hugh_Ruka]

4 hours ago, eliastion said:

Mostly the wrong problems and/or addressed in wrong ways. Every hotfix I'm more doubtful of WG's ability to balance anything about CVs...

 

1. It wasn't rockets that were too powerful against DDs. It was the situational awareness on planes. It's ok for DDs to be easy to kill with dedicated weaponry - they should be hard to FIND. And that is actually not solved by better concealment - this particular change strengthens AA cruisers (that actually didn't need it), not DDs. DDs will still be located based on "early warning system" in the form of "hey, something sees your planes". Also, the bigger, less maneuverable DDs remain just as screwed as they were against both rockets and HE bombs - and they weren't exactly in a good position compared to the ones that trun better to begin with

2. The weapon that actually was excessively powerful against DDs was HE bombs, a weapon system that's NOT supposed to be an anti-DD one. And yet they remain unchanged despite dealing tons of damage to the ship class that shouldn't be the primary target...

3. Nerfs focusing on making CVs more annoying to play rather than less powerful are a bad idea. Well, Midway gets torpedo damage nerf rather than even worse handling, so I guess there actually is a bit of improvement compared to how they were nerfing Hakuryu. Then again, WG keeps balancing by meddling with the already low flooding chance despite the fact that in a week we're getting flooding nerfed to the ground reworked, so any balancing around flooding chance is going to have to be revisited anyway (for both planes and DDs)

4. Fighters really needed the buff to target acquisition and speed... so that would be a good change. However, instead of just fixing that and looking what happens, WG combines that with patrol radius buff AND making them more numerous. Fine tuning with a sledgehammer - WG's specialty

 

To sum it up: a bad patch that doesn't solve the core issues and even when it does touched on needed changes, it introduces them in an extremely heavy-handed manner that is more likely to cause new problems rather than actually balance things.

Point 1 is spot on !!! The proper solution would be:

 

Remove Situational awareness from planes and swap it with Priority target

 

That means a DD with AA turned OFF will not warn the wing commander of his presence and actually has a real option to evade. CV will still see ho many AA auras he entered for free which is a much more important information.

[Shaka_D]

59 minutes ago, IanEglin said:

Some DDs were overpowered, the new CVs corrected this imbalance

Did the change not affect all dd's? Because you're stating the new cv's corrected the balance against the overpowered dd's - so what would the new cv's have done to 'standard' dd's then? Left them alone or would the standard dd's have become even more weak? The new cv's affected all dd gameplay in blanket fashion, hardly selectively at all.

[BattleWagon]

My opinion is, CV's cant really destroy DD's alone (from full HP) if there is even one CA closeby its almost impossible. So now CVs are almost defenseless against any solo counter with DDs. I think the DD players are just playing it too fast to cap leaving out of any AA range from the team and thats why they complain. Solo players get most of it.

[Hugh_Ruka]

3 hours ago, T3ddyBear said:

The WG "balanz" department just don't have a clue do they?

 

"We have all the stats da!" what an utter joke, what happened to the "incremental" changes? You are just swinging a sledge hammer every week now.

 

There's a problem with DD's being perma spotted and focused (yes there is) but hey we'll stop CV's spotting them and doing any sort of meaningful damage, but we'll extend radar duration and range... BALANZ DA!

 

Oh and how many times have I landed 6 torps on a BB with my Midway only to come away with less 15k damage, TOO MANY TIMES TO COUNT, so what do you do, the BBabies complain and torps get nerfed again, the whole flood mechanic is changing but let's swing that monkey wrench at the problem again.

 

It simply beggars belief, one knee jerk reaction after another, I seriously hope someone high up in WG is looking at what is going on and will start to ask some pointed questions to some of the WG staff, it is simply not good enough.

 

So, off we go again, into open beta, whilst burning premium time, whilst the WG balanz department goes through, what can only be described as, their at work training.

 

Jeez, how do you guys let it get so messed up.

 

TB.

They do have all the stats, they just lack the game experience to interpret them properly it seems ...

[Pikkozoikum]

39 minutes ago, m3c0 said:

When people were complaining about the totally useless Shokaku/Haku and the superior Lexi/Midway in the Developer Bulletin 0.8.1, I was really hoping that WG will do something about it.

I was hoping that they will buff a bit the IJN carriers again so they are more competitive.

 

And actually WG did something about it. And WG really made both US and IJN CV branches competitive.

Competitive in being totally useless.

 

CV rework = EPIC FAIL. Thx WG for this FARCE! [edit]Some rage removed[/edit]

I read somewhere that the Midway torps get nerfed

[Lieam]

Yet not a single tuning to *all planes get shredded on escape after 1 attack* or *completely dominant AA vs any planes even 4 km close in +0/+1/+2 MM?* CVs are simple scout ships in those match ups.

 

CVs have become joke. I understand CV were first completely overpowered and now the other way around. 80% of games CV captains get spit upon in chat for playing poorly (or playing CV at all) but ppl dont realize planes can not get close to any medium AA ship of equal or higher tier.

 

 The CV rework made CV look gorgerous, but the appeal, balance, any joy or balance of the CV play is gone.

 

I do not need to strike and strike  again for hundreds of thousands of free damage to surface ships but there are 80% of matches when CV can barely contribute. The AA vs disengage is unbalanced and planes still can not engage+escape. Continuous AA waay > plane squads. More than 1 strike is imposible without losing whole squads etc.

 

***

For further points I would just repeat what I said i other posts (and I was not the only one). That's it for me here tho. Peace to all

[Pikkozoikum]

2 minutes ago, Lieam said:

Yet not a single tuning to *all planes get shredded on escape after 1 attack* or *completely dominant AA vs any planes even 4 km close in +0/+1/+2 MM?* CVs are simple scout ships in those match ups.

 

CVs have become joke. I understand CV were first completely overpowered and now the other way around. 80% of games CV captains get spit upon in chat for playing poorly (or playing CV at all) but ppl dont realize púlanes can not get close to any medium AA ship of equal or higher tier.

 

 The CV rework made CV look gorgerous, but the appeal, balance, any joy or balance of the CV play is gone.

 

Quote

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.

 

[Hugh_Ruka]

Dear Wargaming,

 

It's about time we have a discussion about what role you envision the CV should play in the tactical and strategical side of things. Up till now, you only told us how you want them to play as in the look and feel. You even implemented that without regard for some crucial game mechanics. It is my firm belief, that the current concept is flawed by design and so far your "all over the place" tweaks seem to confirm it as not one of them made things better.

 

Please start talking to your playerbase with some respect and don't consider them to be total morons (I don't say I may not be one, pride is a human sin after all).

[bondone]

6 hours ago, DuneDreamer said:

They are just creating more work for the developers in a situation in which they could have just reverted to a pre-0.8 update with better results.

 

The live experiment with the player base goes on...

wows FUBAR and BAKA BOMBED = RIP !

[Ungrim_Baraz]

Utter trash. and very very sad. This announcement along with your plans made public for development until 8.4 show above all how far from ready the whole CV rework concept was, as the whole community told you during private and publlic test, but your arrogance and stuborness won over sense and reasson and you committed, stupidly, to a fixed release on a given update instead of waiting for feature ready...

I am fed up of giving this same feedbackonce and again, let´s see if anyone in WG reads it: @Tuccy, @Sub_Octavian, @MrConway, @Crysantos

• Lack of CV hull control: leads to stupid dumbification with autoconsumables, annoying experience (stupid and annoying autopilot), and aborted strikes (in which you might have spent consumables) just for the sake of, for example, changing the lame AA sector. CVs are, as  Fara said, a dual entity, a host and a deployed unit you need to take care of both by nature. If you are keen on not giving any management over the CV hull, [edited]leave it in port (outside the map) and let the palyer just control air strikes from outside the map and call it WoWs meets WoWp. As long as this game is WoWs, having an active role of the CV hull and the deck management should be imperative.
• Lack of proper deck operations: CVs should have a "manpower" resource, a kind of currency, constantly generated (i.e. 100 per second) to be spent on whatever combination of squadrons the player wanted to prepare (each one with potentially a different cost in manpower. example by double tapping the 2/3/4 keys, because 1 is hull, the preparation of said squadron is enabled or not. to actually launch a given squadron single tap the key and then left click). This would lead to you WG having a better control over the hp genenrated per second by the CV unlike now in which this greatly varies depending on wheher the CV player tries to stick just to one squadron type (low hp generation) or cycles (forced cylcle independent on the battle conditions) in order to have three queues of squadron preparation and hence lack of depth and strategic decissions because the squadron choice is tied to just maximizing the CV´s hp generation.
• Returning damaged planes to the CV lead to free hp generation: Returning damaged planes should go through a partial preparation time (perfectly feasible to implement with the previous manpower concept just applying a proportional cost in manpower) because if the AA was not overbuffed this leads (as did on 0.8.0 release) to the situation in which low AA ships could never score kills and hence could not hamper the CV player. Good CV players were always capable of returning damaged planes to the deck and hence insta-repair them getting a higher hp output than what the preapartion time (and hence your hp generation prediction) would allow had any plane been destroyed. This leads to the need of overbuffing AA in order to force kills on squadrons and avoid this lack of continuity in the model (you know, integer numbers: the planes, vs continious: the hp generated / destroyed)
• Lack of actual player invovlement on the AA defense (seriously, the sector is lame beyond measure, boring and there is absolutely nothing to do vs the incoming planes once the sector is configured) leads to skill based attack vs pure RNG based defense: The best you can hope for is an average RNG defense good enough but not overpowered and with low variance so as not to be perceived as inconsistent. This will always be too strong vs bad CV players (which will not be able to learn because there is no defense player behavior invovlment, and hence get frustrated and sotp palying CVs) and too little vs good CVs (which will runaway becoming even better) and et volia, you have the receipt for player skill gap once again. the only counter is [edited]skill based AA defense vs skill based attack. In another post (Upcoming Fix To AA Mechanics) I have already suggested that the AA accuracy should decrease with the speed and turning radius of the ship leading to higher AA vs stationary targets and lower vs maneuvering ones: the CV player could hence estimate the AA power infront without the need of committing to a potentially impossible attack, as any BB can now assess on whether it is worth firing the slow reloading guns at a target properly angled or not. Moreover, that is the reasson whz Def AA or any other buff should not change the aplha damage of the flak as no other weapon in the game can change its aplha strike, this leads to overkill if the flak is already strong or unpredictability for the CV if the target pops Def AA as the CV player cannot assess the flak dmamage beforehand.
• IMHO (I know it is controversial) the air spotting and the fact that CVs could hunt isolated DDs was PERFECT, because it made solo yolo DD capping imposible and made capping a team effort and not a DD duel (as the old RTS CV was a CV duel). Moreover the great air spotting was also perfect because it rendered obsolete the obnoxious Concelment Expert meta which is dull boring and a must to go full stealth. I sincerely think that a good deal of problems with all this [edited] rework could be avoided if you [edited]treated planes as planes and gave altitude controls (in a discrete way like you did wit hthe submarines on the Halloween event) which could affect both the attack run preparation/accuracy and the spotting, you could easily link spotting (either class related or dispalcement, i.e. max hp, related) to altitude: Higher altitude less AA impact, maybe longer more innaccurate but faster planes on the attack run initiated from big height, and less intel gathered maybe DD spotting only from sea level or low level, cruisers from mid, and BBs even from max altitude.
   

As I said at the beginning, the worst part is that all this just shows how far from ready the whole rework was... sad very sad.

Oh btw, @MrConway send this special message to the Lead game developer: "Go "Nope" yourself"! it is a disgrace how you replied to Fara. If anyone does not know what this is about:

PD: I hope the Indomitable sales bombs, so you feel in the wallet what a disaster all this crap has become...

[bondone]

2 minutes ago, Hugh_Ruka said:

Dear Wargaming,

 

It's about time we have a discussion about what role you envision the CV should play in the tactical and strategical side of things. Up till now, you only told us how you want them to play as in the look and feel. You even implemented that without regard for some crucial game mechanics. It is my firm belief, that the current concept is flawed by design and so far your "all over the place" tweaks seem to confirm it as not one of them made things better.

 

Please start talking to your playerbase with some respect and don't consider them to be total morons (I don't say I may not be one, pride is a human sin after all).

 

27 minutes ago, Hugh_Ruka said:

They do have all the stats, they just lack the game experience to interpret them properly it seems ...

they are not going to roll the game back and stop the death rattle , TIME TO TELL THEM THEY ARE GREAT, EVERYTHING IS JUST FINE ! 

 A fast death is better than a painful slow one ,     The proper word is FUBAR !

[Pikkozoikum]

1 minute ago, bondone said:

 

they are not going to roll the game back and stop the death rattle , TIME TO TELL THEM THEY ARE GREAT, EVERYTHING IS JUST FINE ! 

 A fast death is better than a painful slow one ,     The proper word is FUBAR !

A slow death is more efficient than a fast one. If a ship lives 5 minutes longer, then this ship can keep firing for 5 more minutes and that can be a win...

[janneman77]

how much damage  do the missiles do at the moment in one attack run on a DD?

I myself mainly see numbers between 1000 and 2000. sometimes a little more. 

are there people who regularly do much more  

 

[bondone]

49 minutes ago, Ungrim_Baraz said:

Utter trash. and very very sad. This announcement along with your plans made public for development until 8.4 show above all how far from ready the whole CV rework concept was, as the whole community told you during private and publlic test, but your arrogance and stuborness won over sense and reasson and you committed, stupidly, to a fixed release on a given update instead of waiting for feature ready...

I am fed up of giving this same feedbackonce and again, let´s see if anyone in WG reads it: @MrConway, @Crysantos

• Lack of CV hull control: leads to stupid dumbification with autoconsumables, annoying experience (stupid and annoying autopilot), and aborted strikes (in which you might have spent consumables) just for the sake of, for example, changing the lame AA sector. CVs are, as  Fara said, a dual entity, a host and a deployed unit you need to take care of both by nature. If you are keen on not giving any management over the CV hull, [edited]leave it in port (outside the map) and let the palyer just control air strikes from outside the map and call it WoWs meets WoWp. As long as this game is WoWs, having an active role of the CV hull and the deck management should be imperative.
• Lack of proper deck operations: CVs should have a "manpower" resource, a kind of currency, constantly generated (i.e. 100 per second) to be spent on whatever combination of squadrons the player wanted to prepare (each one with potentially a different cost in manpower. example by double tapping the 2/3/4 keys, because 1 is hull, the preparation of said squadron is enabled or not. to actually launch a given squadron single tap the key and then left click). This would lead to you WG having a better control over the hp genenrated per second by the CV unlike now in which this greatly varies depending on wheher the CV player tries to stick just to one squadron type (low hp generation) or cycles (forced cylcle independent on the battle conditions) in order to have three queues of squadron preparation and hence lack of depth and strategic decissions because the squadron choice is tied to just maximizing the CV´s hp generation.
• Returning damaged planes to the CV lead to free hp generation: Returning damaged planes should go through a partial preparation time (perfectly feasible to implement with the previous manpower concept just applying a proportional cost in manpower) because if the AA was not overbuffed this leads (as did on 0.8.0 release) to the situation in which low AA ships could never score kills and hence could not hamper the CV player. Good CV players were always capable of returning damaged planes to the deck and hence insta-repair them getting a higher hp output than what the preapartion time (and hence your hp generation prediction) would allow had any plane been destroyed. This leads to the need of overbuffing AA in order to force kills on squadrons and avoid this lack of continuity in the model (you know, integer numbers: the planes, vs continious: the hp generated / destroyed)
• Lack of actual player invovlement on the AA defense (seriously, the sector is lame beyond measure, boring and there is absolutely nothing to do vs the incoming planes once the sector is configured) leads to skill based attack vs pure RNG based defense: The best you can hope for is an average RNG defense good enough but not overpowered and with low variance so as not to be perceived as inconsistent. This will always be too strong vs bad CV players (which will not be able to learn because there is no defense player behavior invovlment, and hence get frustrated and sotp palying CVs) and too little vs good CVs (which will runaway becoming even better) and et volia, you have the receipt for player skill gap once again. the only counter is [edited]skill based AA defense vs skill based attack. In another post (Upcoming Fix To AA Mechanics) I have already suggested that the AA accuracy should decrease with the speed and turning radius of the ship leading to higher AA vs stationary targets and lower vs maneuvering ones: the CV player could hence estimate the AA power infront without the need of committing to a potentially impossible attack, as any BB can now assess on whether it is worth firing the slow reloading guns at a target properly angled or not. Moreover, that is the reasson whz Def AA or any other buff should not change the aplha damage of the flak as no other weapon in the game can change its aplha strike, this leads to overkill if the flak is already strong or unpredictability for the CV if the target pops Def AA as the CV player cannot assess the flak dmamage beforehand.
• IMHO (I know it is controversial) the air spotting and the fact that CVs could hunt isolated DDs was PERFECT, because it made solo yolo DD capping imposible and made capping a team effort and not a DD duel (as the old RTS CV was a CV duel). Moreover the great air spotting was also perfect because it rendered obsolete the obnoxious Concelment Expert meta which is dull boring and a must to go full stealth. I sincerely think that a good deal of problems with all this [edited] rework could be avoided if you [edited]treated planes as planes and gave altitude controls (in a discrete way like you did wit hthe submarines on the Halloween event) which could affect both the attack run preparation/accuracy and the spotting, you could easily link spotting (either class related or dispalcement, i.e. max hp, related) to altitude: Higher altitude less AA impact, but less intel gathered.
   

As I said at the beginning, the worst part is that all this just shows how far from ready the whole rework was... sad very sad.

Oh btw, Special message to the Lead game developer: "Go "Nope" yourself" it is a disgrace how you replied to Fara. If anyone does not know what this is about:

 

they are the GAME GODS , they will not change direction away from making IT INTO WOW Ships and PLANES  , but forget the ships ! 

they should be just arcade targets  , RESPAWN THE SHIPS TO !   Planes A D A D DA MOUSE PAD  F  11 A D A D  DA D A  F  22 AND SO ON   oh what fun  !

[bondone]

3 minutes ago, Pikkozoikum said:

A slow death is more efficient than a fast one. If a ship lives 5 minutes longer, then this ship can keep firing for 5 more minutes and that can be a win...

 or at least fun  .  wows  IS IN  S L O W  DEATH MODE  !   funding will stop  who likes this mess . all games die sooner or later ,  I PLAYED THIS FOR 3 YEARS  fubar its over . The corps just not in the grave yet WOW START A NEW GAME    WOWsail boats !

[ForlornSailor]

15 minutes ago, janneman77 said:

how much damage  do the missiles do at the moment in one attack run on a DD? 

I myself mainly see numbers between 1000 and 2000. sometimes a little more. 

are there people who regularly do much more 

 

Aand you completly ignore, that you keep spotting the DD for your team or stop him from capturing objectives / spotting for his team / getting unseen into a position, from where he can deal massive damage to your team. You know. teamplay stuff. All the things you are supposed to do in a team-oriented game. And things that make you win games.

[JuneauEu]

I can understand the change to fighters, I mean seriously, I can keep a DD spotted and always hit him, I mean I can't kill one unless he forgets his detonation flag... As it takes 4 or 5 full launches to kill a DD but hey ho... it needs a nerf if you can always hit something. Even if you don't really do any damage...

But what I really, genuinely, do not understand - nerfing the Torps? I mean, they are already useless, 4km range - yes, you can almost always hit because you have to get into knife range, and you can only really go for solo targets as otherwise your entire squadron is dead. If you couldn't hit then they would be beyond pointless.  But just looking at the stats : https://wows-numbers.com/ship/4179605488,Midway/

Average damage 76k, compared to pre-changes where it was 96 k. If you go and look at the Battleships, their average damage is 85-130k. So already 10k lower average damage then the lowest Battleship at T10, and you're nerfing the damage even more so? At least make them longer range, or something USEFULL.

I mean seriously genuine quiestion WG/anyone - Why? What rationale is there behind lowering the damage?

I really want to like CVs, but, playing as a USN CV seems a poor choice compared to IJN and your nerfing the weak one... just. /confused

[Hundigo]

I do agree with what most forumusers write that it's been 'nerfed' again too much for the CV's. 

 

I play most of my games as DD, 2/3 of all my games are as DD player. I self even admit that with the CV's in the game it's much better for us as DD players. Finally the teammembers in the match accept that you don't rush anymore as DD player. And so we finally can play our class more in depth. 

 

It's already written by others but I repeat it anyway so WG would take it concideration. The most problems we have as DD player is when there are 2 CV's on each side in the game. I also see for my self verry easy solutions to solve the issue;  make it in the MM that only 1 CV per team is in the match. For us (players) it seems indeed simple as solution and we can't understand why it would be so difficult to change the algoritme in the MM for WG. 

 

Does it happen that a CV player focus on a DD in the game ? Yes. But I self don't have any problems with it. Its part of the game, I choosed DD and another player choosed CV. Each his/her choice. Can a (good  --- higher tier) CV player destroy me in one attack round ( I mean with this his attack squadron, he/ has to launch 2 or 3 attacks) ? Yes he can. Still not a problem for me, it's part of the game. 

 

Let us be honest, I self never complain when I can get another DD out with 1 of my torps. With 1 torp hit, every DD in the game is or dead or crippeled too almost no health left. I never complain neither when it happens to me. So why not for a good CV player to take a DD out ? That CV player need at least 3 and 2 attack salvo's before he would destroyed me completely. 

 

So  I self (as hardcore DD player) share the feelings and the thoughts that other forumusers here also have; You are 'nerfing' it too much for the CV players. 

 

Suggestions are;

 

1) Give it more time. So that we all  players can addapt the new playstyle. 

2)  If WG wish to do things in a hurry ? No problem for me, Fix that we only have 1 CV in the MM and not 2. And the stats and data you receive from these games shall be more relaible on how the players addapt the new playstyle and there for no need for an every weekly 'rushly hotfix' what doesn't solve the issue at all for the moment. 

 

Thanks ;)

 

 

[Bear__Necessities]

[Ilya_Wolf]

2 hours ago, DFens_666 said:

Yes, but if you go back, one guy was saying that it would get worse, see here:

 

There is no stealth AA CURRENTLY on Neptune and Minotaur. So we told him, he was wrong. And you jumped in, because we were talking about something else

After the update, they will be unspotted by the time you fly into their AA range yes. But its simply wrong what the other guy said.

so explain to me how when scouting using a cv the exact moment you see the minotaur/neptune and turn away at your maximum speed (approach from the side too, to maximize chance of not getting wrecked by them)

FLAK BUBBLES EVERYWHERE

they keep popping flak up in the face of my planes, while looking back they show 7.8km away and flak still apears infront of me and planes take damage........

 

maybe you should try actually playing the cv and encounter the ships in question before you look at numbers and say "but look this is how its supposed to work"

its bugged. almost all ships actually shoot AA 0.5-1km beyond their supposed max AA range.

 

it is already the case that just finding the position of a neptune/minotaur costs about 1 plane from the squad while using boost to escape them.

soon we will be WELL within their effective AA kill range and lose half or all of the squad before we are able to boost the planes out of their range.