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

CV rework failed every test it was set.

238 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[PARAZ]
Beta Tester
10,054 posts
15,733 battles
13 minutes ago, DoktorJ said:

Every issue that 0.8.0 was supposed to fix has remained, and arguably increased.

 

notsurprisedkirk.jpg

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
Players
5,387 posts
6,781 battles

Ill just jump in and correct you on number 1:

As MrConway said a couple of weeks ago, the skill gap was only for one player looking at the 4 different ship classes, f.e.

Someone has average WR with DDs/CAs/BBs, but 70% with CVs, thats a skill gap for WG.

If another player has equal WR in all classes, then its no skill gap.

 

They didnt want to balance the skill gap between players, they wanted to balance the skill gap between different classes. I mean, thats like really dumb imo, but whatever i guess :cap_fainting:

I think they used that arguement, because people who are good with in RTS games, were good with RTS CVs, even if they were bad with other ships. Viceversa for people who are bad in RTS games, while being good at wows in general

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[OP-B]
Beta Tester
902 posts
4,155 battles
12 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:

Ill just jump in and correct you on number 1:

As MrConway said a couple of weeks ago, the skill gap was only for one player looking at the 4 different ship classes, f.e.

Someone has average WR with DDs/CAs/BBs, but 70% with CVs, thats a skill gap for WG.

If another player has equal WR in all classes, then its no skill gap.

 

They didnt want to balance the skill gap between players, they wanted to balance the skill gap between different classes. I mean, thats like really dumb imo, but whatever i guess :cap_fainting:

I think they used that arguement, because people who are good with in RTS games, were good with RTS CVs, even if they were bad with other ships. Viceversa for people who are bad in RTS games, while being good at wows in general

Really? No wonder cv gameplay got downgraded that much. Now I can become a gut cv player as well. 

  • Funny 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
3,135 posts
14,150 battles

Excellent post from the OP! :Smile_honoring:

My reaction to this point is more muted, however:

 

" Carrier tiers. Carriers should be given +1/-1 MM until the odd tier ships are introduced, then given MM equal to their tier only. No other ship class is either so hammered or hammering as a CV. No meaningful balance metrics can be gathered whilst the existing +2/-2 MM remains in force. "

 

The problem I have with this - it is giving preferential treatment to one class, which already has a big surviviability advantage.

Politically (in-game politics I am talking about), if you give carriers +1/-1 MM then you should do it for ALL ship types.

It would make balancing the AA much easier also.

 

I have not checked your stats but I suspect that you are a very good player. What you are feeling when uptiered in a carrier is exactly what us plebs feel when being uptiered by two levels in a cruiser.

  • Cool 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CATS]
Players
17,828 posts
11,758 battles
  1. Skill gap is lower
  2. Alpha strike is definetly lower
  3. AA system was defintely rebalanced, but is not finished
  • Cool 3
  • Funny 4
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[UTW]
Alpha Tester
2,015 posts
7,880 battles
18 minutes ago, Admiral_H_Nelson said:

What you are feeling when uptiered in a carrier is exactly what us plebs feel when being uptiered by two levels in a cruiser.

2

 

Actually, no, this is not the same feeling, and the problem ain't exactly the same. Of course you have to be wary of the tier +2 ships in a cruiser, but never are you just cockblocked in the same way a carrier does. The presence of a +2 AA cruiser in a zone just denies the carrier of any option, whereas the T-2 cruiser still have guns. I wholly prefer to be in an Abruzzi in a T9 match, or an Aoba in T8 than being a Shokaku in TX. Same is true for any carrier in T6 in a T8 match. 
And on the opposite, being top tier as a carrier is hell for any T-2 ship, who will have absolutely no mean of defending itself. Fuso bullying in Lexington is a thing... The way CV are facing different problems than surface ships is to me a valid justification of having them put at +1/-1, that just adds to the fact their lines are not uneven tiered anymore. They are already an exception.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SQRL]
Players
260 posts
11,876 battles

In a game yesterday our CV went after a mino at the start of the game, whereas their one scouted, and then quickly started to pick off the DDs (including me). Within those opening 30 seconds - 100% guaranteed loss. You get a potato in any other class, it's a pain - but it's not the end of the world. Not the case with CVs. To me that's always going to be the problem - no matter what WG do to try and balance it.

 

The average damage for a CV might have dropped,  but the influence hasn't.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[O-P-C]
Players
407 posts
8,836 battles

terrible skill gap because they practiced in test server and during design of gameplay who know all tricks and exploits ,rest of us got 0 and new players are few also dont know a thing.

strikes are now terrible ,annoying and still deadly.

aa was awful and amateurish ,with many urgent patches released that made whole game unplayable and confusing as hell ,ships obsolete ,tactics null and void.

huge step back in reverse for wows.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
[SCRUB]
Beta Tester
1,618 posts
8,112 battles

As far as I understood it the "skill gap" thingy was about the other cv player being so much better in RTS that he could simply lock the bad cv out of the game while still doing his damage.

Now the CV interaction with each other is limited so much (local consumable fighter only) that this isn't really the case anymore.

The bad cv players will still keep on being bad (or even worse because doing damage is harder now), but they won't be unable to even play anymore just because the enemy cv is so much better.

in that point they achieved their goal. If the way they did it is a good thing is debatable though.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BLUTE]
Beta Tester
9 posts
6,504 battles

this is so wrong in many aspects... maybe you should play carriers (and lern them) before posting stuff in the forum... but honestly.. did you ever had an  game against a t10 carrier before the rework?

 

1) achieved; skill cap is lower then before.. 

    old: good players could totally dominate the enemy cv [deplane him fast] and establish air superiority and then rain havoc on the enemy team.. there was only a slim (or none) chance to win a game if the enemy cv was a unicum and you cv a                 tomato

   new: there is still a skill cap (good player will give better support, will spot and dont waste his planes) but it has no huge impact.. it has the same impact like if your dd is a tomato and the enemy dd is good; youl will have a hard time, but you 

             can win nonetheless.

 

2) achieved: the alphastike is way lower

    old: getting divebombed (tirpitz say hello....) or crossdroped for 60k dmg? no problem.. i good Tx-cv will have a lot (but short) fun with you. 

    new: torpedo drop from midway or hakuryu will do about 10k dmg to TX bbs (if all (6/2)torpedo hits.. sure they can drop multiple times... but then its your fault driving alone in the water, same is true for db; they will drop you one time with 5-30k dmg (depends on rng      and your wasd-hacks); but they are extreme squishy; getting droped a second or third time means (again).. you dont have much aa and you drive alone (= its your own fault... adapt or die)

 

3) achieved (somewhat)

    old/new : there is no real diffrence.. in the old system you had a good chance to shot down the planes fast enough so you dont get dmg (in an AA-ship, with def aa active); and you got some good dmg if you failed; in the new system there is a small chance to kill all planes before the first drop (happens, but even aa cruiser cant rely on it); but you get less dmg and there is nearly no way the enemy cv will turn and strike you again with the same squad).

 

so i totally disagree with your points. maybe its because you are a below average player and thats why you have a diffrent point of view..or you have never played against (a good) Tx carrier in the old system..or you just have forgotten how "fun" this was.

  • Cool 6
  • Bad 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[RONIN]
Beta Tester
3,078 posts
6,135 battles
3 minutes ago, Miessa3 said:

As far as I understood it the "skill gap" thingy was about the other cv player being so much better in RTS that he could simply lock the bad cv out of the game while still doing his damage.

Now the CV interaction with each other is limited so much (local consumable fighter only) that this isn't really the case anymore.

The bad cv players will still keep on being bad (or even worse because doing damage is harder now), but they won't be unable to even play anymore just because the enemy cv is so much better.

in that point they achieved their goal. If the way they did it is a good thing is debatable though.

This was also one of the barriers to entry for new CV players. They couldnt learn because of how much they got locked out. The new version they can still do badly, but they do badly because of their own choices, not because a better player is strafing their planes to death as soon as they launch.

Of course since theres now no autodrop, theres no crutch for the really bad players, so they now are capable of performing terribly

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[PARAZ]
Beta Tester
10,054 posts
15,733 battles
7 minutes ago, Lorien said:

there is still a skill cap (good player will give better support, will spot and dont waste his planes) but it has no huge impact.. it has the same impact like if your dd is a tomato and the enemy dd is good; youl will have a hard time, but you 

             can win nonetheless.

 

57822c19e1ad1.png

 

You're vastly underestimating the potential impact of a truly skilled reworked CV. It is actually higher than the RTS iteration.

 

10 minutes ago, Lorien said:

getting droped a second or third time means (again).. you dont have much aa and you drive alone (= its your own fault... adapt or die)

 

So same as before except you're gonna take more damage.

Oh, and the CV returns in 30 seconds instead of 3 minutes. So even more damage than before.

  • Cool 7
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[LO1]
Alpha Tester
1,421 posts
4,896 battles

1 skill gap like in all ships effects the game... but you no longer have the best CV players shutting out plebs, the pleb may still suck due to flying in to AA over and over but its down to him to learn and not be shut out by a noobicum

 

2 Alpha strike! well any one can get a detonation.    But if i want to kill some one i have to work at it... unless that player goes rambo and there CV offers no protection for them!

 

3 tbh still think they are working on this... and you cant have so strong a AA that the CV player cant do any damage in the game.

 

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-AP-]
Players
1,640 posts
3,751 battles

Honestly at this point just remove carriers, yes  its sad to see a dimension of the game dissapearing, but its never worked, and going in this direction, never will.

  • Cool 12
  • Bad 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
345 posts

I am getting to enjoy certain aspects of the new CVs but the thing that kills it dead it matchmaking. Get T6 up to T 8 ot T8 up to T10  and you may as well just AFK. Its useless trying to attack anything 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[LO1]
Alpha Tester
1,421 posts
4,896 battles
24 minutes ago, El2aZeR said:

 

You're vastly underestimating the potential impact of a truly skilled reworked CV. It is actually higher than the RTS iteration.

 

I am finding the most impact in games, is the amount of unskilled players of all classes, that you have on your side effects the game.  

 

T10 BB player 31% wr in one game!  how do you get that low a WR?  ( thats is the over all WR and not just that ships BTW :/ )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[RONIN]
Beta Tester
3,078 posts
6,135 battles
3 minutes ago, gustywinds said:

I am getting to enjoy certain aspects of the new CVs but the thing that kills it dead it matchmaking. Get T6 up to T 8 ot T8 up to T10  and you may as well just AFK. Its useless trying to attack anything 

I would disagree. They are perfectly capable of attacking, you just have to be sensible with your targets (dont pick the two minotaurs), and realistic with your expectations - you arent going to get full strikes against a montana.

 

You want to play with a vulture mentality if you're a bottom tier CV. Spot lots, prey on weak ships (isolated DD), go after isolated injured ships (BB on fire with low levels of support), and pick off low HP ships that are trying to hide/run. I'll gladly trade 8 rocket planes for an enemy Zao.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BODEM]
Players
320 posts
5,124 battles
15 minutes ago, thiextar said:

Honestly at this point just remove carriers, yes  its sad to see a dimension of the game dissapearing, but its never worked, and going in this direction, never will.

If WG did that, we could as well shut the whole game down, because if CVs would get terminated, older problems would be the topic of samelike discussions, up until the point we are back to [edited] about how OP BBs/DDs are. Nah, CVs are in quite a good place imo, but the next few points will never be to everybody's liking:

 

-playing a CV

-playing against CVs

-playing as a reworked CV

-accepting anything WG changes/balances/adds

 

So if we would follow what people don't like in the game and would delete all those points, there wouldn't be a game left :)

  • Cool 3
  • Funny 1
  • Bad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,223 posts
7,551 battles
20 hours ago, Xevious_Red said:

Of course since theres now no autodrop, theres no crutch for the really bad players, so they now are capable of performing terribly

 

This, This and THIS ^^^

 

On that statement alone, they have INCREASED the skill gap.  Period.

 

Lets all come to peace with it and get that straight. 

 

21 hours ago, DFens_666 said:

As MrConway said a couple of weeks ago, the skill gap was only for one player looking at the 4 different ship classes, f.e.

Someone has average WR with DDs/CAs/BBs, but 70% with CVs, thats a skill gap for WG.

If another player has equal WR in all classes, then its no skill gap.

 

They didnt want to balance the skill gap between players, they wanted to balance the skill gap between different classes. I mean, thats like really dumb imo, but whatever i guess :cap_fainting:

I think they used that arguement, because people who are good with in RTS games, were good with RTS CVs, even if they were bad with other ships. Viceversa for people who are bad in RTS games, while being good at wows in general

 

@MrConway bless his heart, will say whatever the party line is.  WG know they have screwed this up and now changing their wording on "Skill gap". "oh, we meant this really because bla bla bla.......BS" I don't buy it. Sorry, too old to be fed that kinda crap. 

 

You ask anyone in here what they think skill gap is and the vast majority will tell you it's between THE PLAYERS, not the frigging classes.  

 

RTS thing is just BS.  Lets crucify players that are good at RTS style games? Really WG? If anything it gave something different to the point and shot game we have now.

 

So we have one CV player that literary cant hit ANYTHING because you have to man aim and the other is extremely good at dropping, scouting, avoiding flack, rocketing ect ect...

 

Remember this....A Des on the old system used to completely obliterate planes with defensive AA active.  Now you can get 2 good drops on it and strip health way from it regardless, and that's an AA cruiser purposely built to swat planes, like the Atlanta.   But now i don't have to wait 2-3 minuets for the next run, i can just launch planes again and pile on those fires/floods which stick. Lets not even go on about being up tiered in a CV +2...It's painful for the new casual CV players. But no more so that what you had before before the rework.  Tier 6 planes in a tier 9 match was hell on earth. 

 

So.... The skill gap has INCREASED and the ability to carry games has also INCREASED. 

 

People need to wake up here. Regardless if you like the rework or not, it's all increased. 

 

I said this already but will say it again and use @El2aZeR as an example, even tho their are many others at both ends of the spectrum....... If he is INCREASING his WR, DAMAGE and RP in the rework CV's then that should get the "skill gap" alarm bells ringing considering he was deadly in the old version. Now hes even deadlier, that's all we need :cap_haloween:

 

Old "not so good CV" players have got WORSE as they cant rely on auto dropping anymore or auto clicking fighters. They have to do everything manually now. 

 

And not running out of planes, ever? What a massive bonus for CV players this has been.  Even a single plane left in the sky can alter games by spotting alone (won by a single (well 1 and a half) rocket plane hovering close to single DD left, which our Moskva dispatched from close to max range).  He would not have been able to do that if it wasn't for the endless supply of planes. On the old system, you simply ran out of planes....Simple, no nothing.

 

If you enjoy the new style of CV's then fine. It's not a problem as RTS wasn't for everyone and i completely understand that.  I had my own opinion so sold all of my CV's but that's now in the past and don't hold any grudges .  But when the dust has settled and you ask me if skill has increased and are CV's more capable of carrying games...I will simply state "without a shadow of a doubt"

  • Cool 10
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
Players
5,387 posts
6,781 battles
10 minutes ago, FukushuNL said:

If WG did that, we could as well shut the whole game down, because if CVs would get terminated, older problems would be the topic of samelike discussions, up until the point we are back to [edited] about how OP BBs/DDs are. Nah, CVs are in quite a good place imo

 

What? :cap_wander:

So you say, games without CVs in it are brokenly unbalanced ?! Thats basicly what it boils down to, if CVs were to be removed, every game would be like a game without a CV in it right now... how horrible that would be :cap_hmm:

Just now, Redcap375 said:

 

You ask anyone in here what they think skill gap is and the vast majority will tell you it's between THE PLAYERS, not the frigging classes. 

 

 

Ofc I agree with that... but obviously WG is just :etc_swear: as always.

 

  • Cool 3
  • Funny 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BODEM]
Players
320 posts
5,124 battles
2 minutes ago, Xevious_Red said:

I would disagree. They are perfectly capable of attacking, you just have to be sensible with your targets (dont pick the two minotaurs), and realistic with your expectations - you arent going to get full strikes against a montana.

 

You want to play with a vulture mentality if you're a bottom tier CV. Spot lots, prey on weak ships (isolated DD), go after isolated injured ships (BB on fire with low levels of support), and pick off low HP ships that are trying to hide/run. I'll gladly trade 8 rocket planes for an enemy Zao.

Meh, being sensible with your targets leaves you with the DDs and that 1 BB that stood at the end of the line when they were giving out AA buffs....if they aren't anywhere near other ships that is. If I'm in my Lexington and I'm uptiered, this is what happens: Flying to the enemy line, Minotaur pops up, me taking evasive manouvers, getting a few AA hits while taking forever to get away from it's reach. Worchester...nope. Des moine, nope. Conq, Montana, Rep.....nope, nope, nope. Hinden is sailing with Henri and around 7 km from the mino, which doesn't seem to matter. Let's try the moskva.....and nope, planes are gone too. Ok, where are the DDs? Ah, Gearing! gonna get ya! What is shredding my planes?!? ....And back to the CV.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
Players
1,580 posts
10,610 battles

My biggest grip is double CV games. They suck, they suck big fat donkey :etc_swear:. You can't do anything remotely effective or team based early doors. By mid game when ships get thinned, it gets worse. Unless one of the CV players has sniffed a large pot of glue and yolo'd it just becomes a walk in the park for them. How my battered and barely alive DD and cruiser is supposed to even attempt to beat 2 CV's in the end game is beyond me.

 

I have no problem with 1 CV in a game, I have no problem with purple unicorns shitting on everyone. They got the time to get good, fair play. It's when the game becomes so broken/unbalanced that even my bank accounts looks healthy in comparison, I worry about how WG have managed to piss off almost every body. They rushed out the rework, had to rush in hot fix after hot fix, use the live server for testing... (PTS? What's the point of having it then) and still, keep rinsing the same line about how it will take time. I'm sure when they built the pyramids they said the same thing... and that wasn't done quickly.

 

For the record, I'm trying the new CV's slowly. They just don't engage me. But I'll preserver until I "get them" I suppose. Overall... the game is just becoming....

 

fed up.gif

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BODEM]
Players
320 posts
5,124 battles
2 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:

 

What? :cap_wander:

So you say, games without CVs in it are brokenly unbalanced ?! Thats basicly what it boils down to, if CVs were to be removed, every game would be like a game without a CV in it right now... how horrible that would be :cap_hmm:

 

Ofc I agree with that... but obviously WG is just :etc_swear: as always.

 

What I'm saying is that if people don't [edited] about CVs, they would take the next "bad thing for the game" and trying to get that out of the game. And games with or without CVs are evenly good/bad imo. I have no problem with any game either way. Only when my team as a whole plays crappy. But that has nothing to do with CVs.

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BHSFL]
[BHSFL]
Players
1,925 posts
2 hours ago, DoktorJ said:

Minimum launching distance for Rocket Attack Aircraft should be introduced. Unless you are wanting to kill off destroyers in game. Half the DD's in game have rudder shifts that can't effectively dodge incoming strikes in time. Or vastly decrease the sigma and/or increase the radius of the attack area.

 

Introduced ? You even know what you are speaking about ?? There is already a very bad, gameplay spoiling nerf that does exactly this.....although T4 is not hindered by it, T6 is mildly hindered by it and T8 is greatly hindered by it.  I do not play T10 but i guess it must be even worse then T8.

 

It cannot be worsened or further nerfed (  Strike fighters were already hit by 7 nerfs affecting it ) without making strike fighters completely useless. How many times were you sunk by Strike fighters having full health ? 0 times that is how many times ! You only can be likely killed by strike fighters having less then 1/4 health, so never from a single squadron attack. In truth you were killed by cannon fire from other DD or cruisers. By being spotted.

 

And by design they were meant to find and attack DD. They cannot do that on their own anymore after the nerfs, it is either find a DD or attack a DD that is spotted by other DD, cruisers  or ships.  Yet you cry for more nerfs ? Away with you.

 

Playing a DD one should alter tactics, not cry for nerfs.

 

 

 

  • Cool 1
  • Angry 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×