Update 0.8.1.1

[Asureas]

Interesting with the cruiser aa/air spotting nerf - it never occured to me to do the aa trap thing. It's definitely a nerf to cruisers, in some ways the cv already had a counter to getting caught like that - it has infinite planes.

 

Interesting that some people here feel rockets are ineffective against dds, not my experience (largely on the receiving end of them)

 

Rather disappointed that Missouri's radar is dropping that 500m actually a nerf from its pre cv rework range iirc, seems when every other ship is getting its radar range normalised to 10km.

[Armorin]

14 minutes ago, Asureas said:

Interesting with the cruiser aa/air spotting nerf - it never occured to me to do the aa trap thing. It's definitely a nerf to cruisers, in some ways the cv already had a counter to getting caught like that - it has infinite planes.

 

A CV doesn't have unlimited planes, they take time to regenerate. Throwing planes away will quickly lead to a CV being effectively deplaned. A fractional plane squad will get wiped out before it can get an attack run in.

So one trick is to take out rocket planes first, do dummy drops so that most of the squad returns to the CV deck, and then do a suicide reconnaissance run to get an idea where things are.

Probably not what WG intended.

[Ungrim_Baraz]

I have been here since CBT, never been a good CV player, but I do want them in the game. Sadly the rework is a total failure, and the tweaks announced in 0.8.1.1 nothing but tiny cosmetic changes.

 

@MrConway, @Tuccy, @Crysantos The four biggest [edited]ups of the whole rework are, IMHO:

 

No skill vs skill, the AA is pure RNG. Skill attack vs RNG defense will always yield frustration on either the attackers (never improving or knowing how to as there is no human action on the other end upon which to reflect and learn) or the defender (bound to see their defense overcome if anything is wrong on the balance or just by pure luck), the best you can hope for is an average good enough but not too strong leading to this population split, bad CVs will always be bad, and good ones will always be uncounterable. Easiest thing would be nerfing the ship AA as a function of high speed / tight turnng circle, giving the attacker a way of assessing the power of the enemie´s defense by reading the battlefield (in the same way you assess the armor profile your target is giving you when deciding whether to fire or change target) and the defender a way of influencing its AA and decissions to be made: Stopping for higher AA, or dodging.

 

No plane flight altitude control => Imposible to handle air spotting properly in a risk vs reward model. If you had altitude contol (i.e. like submarines had depth control in the Halloween mode) it would be so simple to avoid perma spotting DDs by just limitting the small ships spotting to low and risky altitudes, and even linking this altitude to the actual attack runs (and AA, having longer ranges and higher overall dps at low altitude and only big AA guns reaching high altitudes but with lower radius and dps approaching a kinda semisphere volume of AA fire in cylinder chunks per altitude level). By the way, about the air spotting detection change... A big load of quick improvised bull... the stealth AA firing is still a perfect and viable reality on things like Gearing, Z-52, Grozovoi, Kitakaze, Harugumo (perfectly capable of devastating a squadron with the long range AA by enabling it once the squadron is, let´s say, 1 km into its long range AA)... What you are implementing is nothing but a second thought rushed patch and not a concept´s flaw solution.

 

No repair time for succesfully returning damaged planes to the deck, this leads to the need of overperforming AA as the only thing that counts is plane kills (discrete in its nature vs continious like damage). If AA was not overbuffed any ship which just damaged planes would see all this damage vanish if the damaged plane returns to the deck, hence it would be an easy way for CV players to exploit mechanics "magically" creating hp upon returning the squadrons. This can only be countered by overbuffing AA in order to actively get plane kills rendering useless the whole concept of multiple attack runs as there will be not much of an squadron left after the first pass (and making nigh impossible avoiding getting deplaned in late game independently on CV player skill / care). The damage model should account for the hp to be recovered by damaged planes returning to the deck making the preparation of these damaged planes to be some time proportional to the preparation of a fresh plane in relation to the hp to be recovered, in this way low AA ships would not loose their contribution to the overal plane hp, and hence do contribute to hindering the CV unlike in the current system in which you either get the palne kill or do nothing, and no low AA ship can get kills unless miracle happens (perfect flak) or AA overbuffed. It is a classical tower defense problem with an inbound hp flux to be countered by dps, but in the current system the hp can magically be created upon returning to the deck, solution: avoid any returnign plane => overbuff AA.

 

No CV Hull control: This leads to the need for stupid idiotic dumb autopilot + auto consumables. Also, pure arrogance from your side refusing to acknowledge the nature of CVs being a dual entity, planes on the one hand, ship on the other. The ship´s control and management is null in this rework and it should not be this way. This is World of WARHSIPS, more ship control is perceived as a clear need. Tiny example: repair on planes should be moved to the CV meaning that the deck crew hurries up to repair the returning squadron (this obviously ties up to the previous point about returnign damaged planes), but this obviously needs proper manual consumables (upon which Superintendent would influence unlike now, as any other ship. Remember? that was one of the rework´s objectives, make CVs be played more inline to other classes making player experience more comparable), because if you eventually make Hakuryu stealth torping a balanced feasible tactic, well, what is repair good for on those planes? I´d like to tell my deck crew to focus on repairing the dive bombers rather than the near mint returning torpedo bombers...

 

All these are core concept flaws which no amount of fine number tunning is ever gonna address. And the community has been giving you this kind of feedback since the very beginning of private test all the way till 0.8.0 was implemented. You never even acknowledged any core concept problems and refused adamantly to things like the CV hull control unanimously requested by the community with deep argumentation like "Nope". Sad, very sad.

PD: @MrConway I do not want to sound aggressive and I do thank you personally for keeping up with the forum so much. I do understand and agree with the live server incremental buff/nerf approach, but I am deeply dissapointed with the rework concept itself and have zero confidence at all on the model ever being balanced and enjoyable with, what I perceive, as concept flaws (and I am not the only one, ask iChase). So, yeah, thank you personally, but not you WG...

[cobrazax]

any chance u will FIX THE PORT INSANE FREEZING PROBLEM ADDED IN 8.0?!
damm this is horrid and u dont even bother to fix it!!!

[Reniwn]

5 minutes ago, cobrazax said:

any chance u will FIX THE PORT INSANE FREEZING PROBLEM ADDED IN 8.0?!
damm this is horrid and u dont even bother to fix it!!!

Year of the UI confirmed.

 

[Sayuri_Valintine]

there are a couple things id like to address when it comes to the CV's

 

1-I don't agree with the Kaga nerf ... she and saipan admittedly can run wiled if there top tier in a match but out of all the prim CV's those 2 struggle the most from being bottom teir in a match i mean at least the Graf and Ent can do a lot of damage to there targets even citadel TX BB's like kerf but never Kaga or Saipan have that damage potential ... its even worse for Kaga since with her T7-ish planes you will sacrifice the hole squad in TX just to get a single attack run in ... her reserves are not able to keep up with suicide attack runs.

 

2- I'm still think WG needs to show there finding from there so called "server date" before or while announcing there is very little communication coming from WG to the community there are many questions that start with "Why?" and you don't answer anything leaving people to think up there own reasons i mean was Kaga really doing that well = to that of Graf? and what Tier matches are you basing this information on T6-X as for saipan she was so bad after the rework i sold her 3rd weak in and unless more love and less hammers comes to all the CV's i plan on selling the hole class on the last day and i know there are many of like mine on this ... from my experiences playing CV's there damage and usefulness changed drastically from match to match iv never played a ship that swayed so much in score or damage ranging from winning a game with only 25K damage done to winning with 150K damage even losing games with with nearly 200K damage all in midway im not sure if this is just me or not but if its not i have no idea how your coming up with changes ... if anyone want to contradict me on how wild the CV's game impact sways get me 5 at lest 5 games in a row to prove I'm wrong don't do an you-tuber and cherry pick your best games that's not how you get the average of a ship ... you need to take best and the worst to actually see how well its doing.

 

3- i still also think CV's are far to stressful to play or the target players for this rework me and many others i know all agree that to do well in a CV you need to try so dam hard just to feel like you effectively helping you team or doing damage in any other class i can just chill and see were it gose and often get 100K+ in any TX ship not in CV and i work my [edited]off in any CV game then theirs the fact i have yet to see a single T4 CV get in the top 5 on there team this is another reason im planing on selling my CV's i mean Hermes is a joke with bombs that shatter on almost every BB and only having that single torp of 3K as its best source of damage ... my line of logic if i can do 100K or even 80K average damage per game in any ship over than CV's then i am actively harming my teams chances of winning by choosing to play a CV.

 

4- all these balancing problems seems to be steaming from one thing as far as i can see and that's the overlapping of CV tiers ... i know you don't want to do this but fixing CV MM would make it SOOOOOOO much easier to balance AA VS CV its nearly impossible to have a T8 CV fell useful in a TX game with out making the TX CV's over powered balancing AA to 1 CV tier makes so much sense  and i don't mean the +1 -1 MM I'm talking about CV's always being top tier in a game and no i don't want to dominate MM make the CV's feel like odd Tier CV's not even so TX would feel more like T9 and so on this will make sure you don't brake the MM system and leave the TX with only T9 and X to fight.

 

As some one that plays all ship classes I honestly want a game were both sides win i want the no fly zone cruisers i want to feel like there are things as a CV i cant attack but at the same time i don't want everything to be that way ... i also want ships i know i can get away with attacking (right now mainly only brainless DD's)  iv always seen Wow's as a rock paper scissors type game of varying degrees (IE skill) with ships having some what flexible rolls with ships that they should avoid and ships that they can easily counter this i hope would encourage team work (i know shocking) and leaving the team that acts most like a team the victor and CV's should be no different in this and right now CV's cant contribute enough out side of spotting to make them a viable ship to use over any other class ... right now i would gladly go with the team with no CV over one that had one cause i know the ship i get to replace the CV will impact my game more and would hope for the better.

 

all these are just my opinions and i thank you for reading this far but since there has been no real comment on my thoughts or feedback i cant tell if anyone is even listening so this will probably be my last post when it comes to CV's as i feel more and more that WG just doesn't care at all about what people seem to say on these forums or if they do they simply don't show it.

[Masa2mune]

I was waiting for this Hakuryu buff, the torpedo planes were my biggest issue. Time to put her to test if she's comfortable enough to play yet.

[VeteranGamer84]

Quote

The range of the "Surveillance Radar" consumable on the battleship Missouri is now 9.5 km instead of 10 km.

Noooooo.. !!

[Master_Mariner]

While it´s nice to have a n improved heal on Hakuryu´s Torpedobombers, she is still bit lacking i mean the attack squadron with 12 planes attack only with 2 Torpedobombers at the same time? wiht the shorter ranged 6km torpedo Torpedobomber upgrade why can´t the squadron not attack with 3 planes instead? Fact is Hakuryu rely more on her Torpedo bombers than on the other attack planes the AP bombs are much less reliable like the HE bombs of Midway.

[eliastion]

5 hours ago, Ungrim_Baraz said:

No skill vs skill, the AA is pùre RNG.

No matter how well thought-out some of your points might be, it doesn't really lend you credibility when your first big statement shows lack of understanding of AA mechanics... Currently there's quite little RNG in AA. It's mostly automatic, yes, but less affected by RNG than, say, main guns.

 

5 hours ago, Ungrim_Baraz said:

No plane flight altitude control => Impossible to handle air spotting properly in a risk vs reward model. Iif you had altitude contol (i.e. like submarines had depth control in the Halloween mode) it would be sooo simple to avoid perma spotting DDs by just limitting the small ships spotting to low and risky altitudes, and even linking this altitude to the actual attack runs. By the way, about the air spotting detection change... A big load of quick improvised bull... the stealth AA firing is still a perfect and viable reality on things like Gearing, Z-52, Grozovoi, Kitakaze, Harugumo (perfectly capable of devastating a squadron with the long range AA by enabling it once the squadron is, lets say, 1 km into its long range AA)... What you are implementing is nothing but a second thought rushed patch and not a concept´s flaw solution.

I won't discuss your main point (not a fan but there's nothing extremely wrong with it on fundamental level) but I just wanted to comment that I fail to see the issue you have with DDs. To put it simply: AA cruiser have lots of AA power. AA DDs (or, well, at least DDs with good AA) are less impressive in that regard - but they have the ability to use their concealment and ambush the planes. Which happens to be consistent with the way DDs fight against everything else: they use their concealment to set up an engagement that's advantageous to them. In fact, I think it's great to have this distinction between cruisers and DDs as AA DDs now actually have a niche: cruisers are better at defending both themselves and some key targets/areas but now there's something that DDs can do and cruisers can't. Isn't this disparity a clear improvement compared to the previous "yeah, you are built as an AA platform but everything you do a cruiser would do better"?

 

5 hours ago, Ungrim_Baraz said:

No repair time for succesfully returning planes to the deck, this leads to the need of overperforming AA as the only thing that counts is plane kills (discrete in its nature vs continious like damage). If AA was not overbuffed any ship which just damaged planes would see all this damage vanish if the damaged plane returns to the deck, hence it would be an easy way for CV players to exploit mechanics "magically" creating hp upon returning the squadrons. This can only be countered by overbuffing AA in order to actively get plane kills rendering useless the whole concept of multiple attack runs as there will be not much of an squadron left after the first pass (and making nigh impossible deplaning in late game independently on CV player skills / care). The damage model should account for the hp to be recovered by damaged planes returning to the deck making the preparation of these dammaged planes to be some time proportional to the preparation of a fresh plane in relation to the hp to be recovered.

You are wrong. Mostly on two issues:

1. AA needs to be able to shoot down planes. This is because people want to feel rewarded for having good AA. They want to see these little flying bugs blow up and fall into the sea. They want the ribbons. Planes that tend to survive but then take more time to be ready just don't provide this satisfaction. If you have good AA, attacking you should mean planes dropping from the sky. Even now people are occasionally frustrating about the perceived lack of risk/sacrifices made by CVs to attack things - can you imagine how frustrating it would be for the surface ships if planes just wouldn't be dying when attacking things that aren't complete AA monsters?

2. Actually, the continuous AA damage works great - on conceptual level - with "multiple attack runs" model. You see, the great AA will start shooting planes pretty far but still won't completely stop an attack (still, it's perfectly ok with attacking great AA ships NOT being a good idea under most circumstances). A decent AA on less AA-oriented ship won't shoot down that many planes BUT it will force the CV to give up halfway through, so even with relatively few planes shot down, the AA still has a mitigating effect on damage taken. And then there's the weak AA that means that the CV can conduct all or at least most of his squadron's attack without suffering heavy losses. All that wouldn't work quite as well if damage was lower but stuck more (causing cooldowns).

[Six_of_Spades]

Hey. the game center is not auto updating for me. it says i have the latest version installed and i hit play. but the log in screen shows an error that my client is an older version. any help ?/

[Mike_of_all_Trades]

the update service from WG launcher is not working for me, can't update to the latest version , so no sailing for now FeelsBadMan

[Captain_Singleton]

yup easy, they messed up the times on the announcement, they put the cet time the same as utc and it's an hour later, it wont back up until 7:30am

from: Wed. 06 Mar. 05:00 CET (UTC+1) / your local time: Wed. 06 Mar. 05:00

until: Wed. 06 Mar. 06:30 CET (UTC+1) / your local time: Wed. 06 Mar. 06:30

 

 

[Torped1ne]

i haven't see nothing for the  returning planes climbing speed after an attack  they said that they wanted them to climb faster in order to do not have them all killed but here there's nothing about that

[Sambor0]

When I try play game I can not do it. Asking me to update client. I have set to automatically update game.

[GA_Tirpitz]

Vor 22 Minuten, Salentine sagte:

yup easy, they messed up the times on the announcement, they put the cet time the same as utc and it's an hour later, it wont back up until 7:30am

from: Wed. 06 Mar. 05:00 CET (UTC+1) / your local time: Wed. 06 Mar. 05:00

until: Wed. 06 Mar. 06:30 CET (UTC+1) / your local time: Wed. 06 Mar. 06:30

However they managed to get the game shut down at 5:00 CET...

[D__Busby]

No update! I'm guessing WG has messed up the times. Again 

---

 

[Captain_Singleton]

[ZeuSueZ1337]

Is this update-crap still going on?

 

Started playing WoWs a while ago due to some friends suggestions - yet I have to experience an update from WG that isnt outright garbage!

Case and point. The update is around 110mb (they say) but noooo.....its actually 3.5 GB (they say) but noooo........its 30+ GB so now my drive for games and crap is now running out of space and I have to faf around when I have the time to prob re-install the entire game. What garbage coding.

 

 

 

AT LEAST let us know how much space we need to allocate to your update-galore so we dont have to guess every time if we have to move stuff around etc.

 

(And plz no comments like "purchase a new hdd" 30+ GB free should be plenty. Instead aim at the lazy [edited]garbage coding)

 

Apologies for the swearing - but this is so pathetic.

[Shomy80]

1. Add spread out button so that the planes do not die so easily from flak, CV need ability to strike AA Cruises it will be costly but it need at least chance to do that.

2.  Give back Hakuryu his weapon from 8.0 you already reduced number of attacking planes, dmg, chance of flooding etc.  Reduce torpedo bomber to 2 waves instead of 3 but it must work like 8.0. + IJN has no He bombers so dealing with DDs is harder they must have some weapons and that weapon is rocket planes (it must be better than current).

 

And something about DDs  1. Don't rush in caps 2. Do not attract attention 3. Turn off AA  4.  Don't hunt CVs alone and you will be fine. 

 

all of you guys want to shoot at CV (farm dmg) but you don't like when CV fighting back ? You like to (farm) but you must be (farmed) as well.

[KHS01]

OMG! Wonderfull patch, I loved this. Good job team. Thank you! 

[Panocek]

First impression on Shokaku buffs are very positive - quicker aim time and attack prep up are handy, increased TB load and 4th heal are really helpful late game and when molesting "AA" cruisers respectively

[InfinityIncarnate]

This update is tested with regards to AA and T6 Warplane gameplay, it's still awful. This CV rework is really, really bad, and each update that you do just keeps making it worse, and even the concept of it doesn't even fix the issues that were present in the pre-rework CV gameplay. You've managed to make it even worse, the skill gap difference is even higher now, and now the controls is working against the player. This is a farce!

Servicing time for T6 Warplanes is HORRIBLE - it takes way too long time to recover warplanes, especially when factoring it in that one will lose most if not all warplanes during and attack, including up until attack one might also have sustained losses. You consider the fact that there is a good deal of travel time between the target and carrier, but also that the warplanes are the equivalent of shells for other warships, guess what happens when you aren't able to launch a full squadron!? Thats right, the attack effiency will drop and make it a lot less like for even one unit of the payload making it through, and especially a lot more likely to get the squadron completely wiped out, which on the bottom line means the CV player can't anything while waiting for warplanes to recover. Not being able to make last minute adjustments before releasing the payload without immense sacrifice to precision, is really, really bad!

WG, you should realize when something is not going to work and currently, no amount of adjustments or tweaks to balance will get it there. It may be that you don't want to be going back to the pre-rework RTS CV gameplay, but you really should revert to, and get back to the drawing board, but this time include the community in coming up with a gameplay model that is enticing and enjoyable for as many as possible, especially including the carrier mains. With the RTS CV gameplay what you primarily had to do lessen the skill gap was to remove manual drop and manual strafing ability. At least with the RTS model, the controls weren't fighting you, unless the UI were bugging, which didn't happen that many times to me, but it did. Where this gameplay we have now, the controls are fighting the player, which makes it a lot more difficult to actually land hits, which only increases the skill gap.

All I can say is, you really should have done your due diligence before implementing this and investing so much effort and resources into it - in my opinion and many others, this rework is a disaster, not just on one front, but many fronts!

[Barbarossa36]

[CrossWax]

Hi guys,

 

Cleveland Liberty camo has a weird effect on the ship, no sound whatsoever comes out when you're firing.

Hope a lil' hotfix could solve the issue ;)

Cheers