Jump to content
You need to play a total of 1 battles to post in this section.
The_EURL_Guy

Developer Bulletin 0.8.6

37 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

WG Team, Master Pirate, Sailing Hamster
1,844 posts

The Public Test server for Update 0.8.6 brings the beginning of the French arc, along with a number of balancing amendments! Be among the first to assess the changes!


Read it on the portal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,107 posts
12,549 battles

0.8.6 announces yet another effective AA buff with respect to 0.8.5, even where the 0.8.5 buff was already extremely strong. 

This is the ninth announced CV nerf since 0.8.0, with 1 buff in between and 2 nerf mitigations. 

 

Perhaps it is time to stop nerfing CVs and instead rework the entire AA system in a proper manner. 

 

We don't want you to blanket nerf CVs anymore, which you have done nearly every update so far. Instead we want you to address specific issues that CV gameplay & counterplay cause, such as excessive CV damage against DDs, excessive spotting/ detection potential by the "planes spotted" indicator and the likes. 

 

Please, revert to the 0.8.4 AA and start work on a better AA system while also working on the other issues separately. The 0.8.5 and especially 0.8.6 AA systems fully go against everything you have ever intended with the CV rework. 

  • Cool 7
  • Funny 2
  • Bad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-AP-]
Players
2,681 posts
6,497 battles
7 minutes ago, Isoruku_Yamamoto said:

0.8.6 announces yet another effective AA buff with respect to 0.8.5, even where the 0.8.5 buff was already extremely strong. 

This is the ninth announced CV nerf since 0.8.0, with 1 buff in between and 2 nerf mitigations. 

 

Perhaps it is time to stop nerfing CVs and instead rework the entire AA system in a proper manner. 

 

We don't want you to blanket nerf CVs anymore, which you have done nearly every update so far. Instead we want you to address specific issues that CV gameplay & counterplay cause, such as excessive CV damage against DDs, excessive spotting/ detection potential by the "planes spotted" indicator and the likes. 

 

Please, revert to the 0.8.4 AA and start work on a better AA system while also working on the other issues separately. The 0.8.5 and especially 0.8.6 AA systems fully go against everything you have ever intended with the CV rework. 

Its not about the amount of nerfs, but the overall power/influence of the ship.

 

If its overperforming, you nerf it, doesnt matter how many times you nerfed it before.

 

And 8.5 aa is a massive improvement over 8.4, no more rng-fest that decides how many planes you shoot down.

  • Cool 4
  • Boring 1
  • Bad 3
  • Angry 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,107 posts
12,549 battles
21 minutes ago, thiextar said:

Its not about the amount of nerfs, but the overall power/influence of the ship.

 

If its overperforming, you nerf it, doesnt matter how many times you nerfed it before.

 

And 8.5 aa is a massive improvement over 8.4, no more rng-fest that decides how many planes you shoot down.

0.8.5 is only an "improvement" in that most CV players have simply quit playing until there are some improvements for the CV. 

You see, in any surface-to-surface combat people expect that both sides can influence  a battle. If you aim well with a battleship, with some luck you might get some citadel hits. 
If the enemy dodges well, he can avoid taking citadel hits. 

 

The RNG fest that has been removed is basically like as if if you aim well with a BB, you'll always hit all shells directly in the enemy citadel, regardless of whether he's steering or not. After all, the CV has literally 0 influence on this AA system- which is exactly why RNG is needed here. To avoid the CV from systematically being put to a disadvantage. 

 

As for the amount of nerfs: i get your point, but as someone who likes CVs and actually bought a premium CV after 0.8.2.1- the point where the storm seemed to have calmed- it's rather annoying to see ONLY nerfs, no buffs. No tweaks, just blanket nerfs. 

I agree that in some aspects CV can overperform, but IMO those specific issues should be addressed rather than nerfing the entire class into oblivion. 

 

Initially the rework was intended not to have reserves, but unlimited planes. Since we get reserves now, aswell as a limited squadron size, i strictly believe that there should be cases- especially when dealing with single low AA ships- where a CV can drop ALL of its armament for a run. In update 0.8.5 this has become nearly impossible- as if you are only allowed to fire 8 barrels on a 3x3 battleship at most. 

 

And finally; WG has effectively admitted that 0.8.5 was a massive over-nerfing of CVs which also caused probably roughly 2/3rds decline in CV battles, and the very next update another AA buff is introduced. I realise this one is only minor, but this is clearly the wrong way to go. 

 

 

Once again, i get where you're coming from, i just sincerely believe that WG is going 100% the wrong way with balancing CVs lately. I've been around in the first testing of the new CVs, which were wonkyy and underperforming as well as slow, but based on the current AA system i'd take that every day of the week over the 0.8.5 system. 

P.S. this was WGs statement. IMO adding another AA buff, even ever so slightly, seems completely out of line to me. 

 

We are aware.

 

As 0.8.5 changes have brought much needed and requested AA DPS consistency, it seems like in many cases the plane losses became slightly excessive, and overall CV efficiency was nerfed too much. While we do like the change, we still need to keep CV efficiency reasonable. Over the weekend and early next week we intend to observe the situation very closely, determine the amount of needed changes to plane HP, and implement a hotfix. Unfortunately, only live server data will help us to polish the change, preserving its core concept  – more rewarding and meaningful anti-air defense. Stay tuned for more news, and we sincerely apologize for any inconvenience.

Edited by Isoruku_Yamamoto
small addition
  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-AP-]
Players
2,681 posts
6,497 battles
4 minutes ago, Isoruku_Yamamoto said:

And finally; WG has effectively admitted that 0.8.5 was a massive over-nerfing of CVs which also caused probably roughly 2/3rds decline in CV battles, and the very next update another AA buff is introduced. I realise this one is only minor, but this is clearly the wrong way to go. 

Theres another one in the works too.

 

Sector system will be reworked to offer better counterplay for the surface ships :Smile_great:

  • Cool 1
  • Bad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TOXIC]
Players
4,786 posts
12,246 battles
4 minutes ago, thiextar said:

Theres another one in the works too.

 

Sector system will be reworked to offer better counterplay for the surface ships :Smile_great:

The thing is that (if it actually does that, I'm doubtful) actually tries to address one of the core problems - the lack of influence from the ship over how effective the AA is. Positioning is extremely important but the direct confrontation itself is CV player fighting against automated system.

 

The recent changes in AA go in the wrong direction, however. While some RNG was taken out of the picture in 8.5, what was affected more was the CV player's ability to mitigate plane losses by proper plane management. What surface ship players often saw as RNG deciding whether they shoot down planes or not was actually - more often than not - the effect of CV player doing things right or not. Yes, with EXTREME bad luck you could lose a plane early (without flying into flak, that is) but in reality it worked more like this:

1. Squadron starts taking damage, it spreads among the planes

2. Squadron is battered

3. Planes start to drop

4. Squadron is wiped out very quickly

If the CV player wanted to conserve planes (and knew how to) the surface ships only noticed (but often didn't pay attention enough to notice) that the squadron only attacked once, max. two times (talking about tX with squadrons sometimes as big as 6x2 Haku TB squadrons) - and that they didn't shoot many, if any, planes. If CV player was reckless or played badly, the planes were blowing up from Flak or got wiped by keeping up the attack for too long. For the surface ship it might look like "then I shot down nothing, now a squadron was wiped, it's all RNG" but that's actually not the case - the problem is that the surface ship has limited influence over what's going on and it makes it harder to perceive the difference in effects as being caused by the other player's skill (or lack of it). It's just tempting to assume that if you don't really control it, then it's outside human control and decided by a "die roll". This also causes the surface ship players (unless they play CVs as well) to underestimate their impact on the fight against planes even further - the PERCEIVED influence over surface-to-planes engagement ends up being even lower than the (already quite moderate) actual influence, further deepening the feeling of frustration of surface-ship-only players. But nerfing CVs to the ground and taking away their interaction as well isn't really addressing the actual problems... it's just making CVs less attractive to play.

 

TL/DR:

RNG was never a problem. The problem is that surface ships' perceived influence over the course of AA engagement is almost nil. It's actually much higher but that "much higher" isn't very high either. But lowering the interactivity from CV side as well does not solve the problem here.

  • Cool 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[POP]
Beta Tester
209 posts
9,485 battles

So WG's spreadsheets show that Monarch is powerful enough to warrant a nerf along with other UK BBs... :cap_hmm: (repair party buffs are not enought to ofset this). Already one of the weakest tier8 BBs without the nerfs. It get's ok overall stats because it is relative easy to play for your average potato (spam HE, don't worry about broadside) aka has really low skill floor. But the skill ceiling is abysmally low too. No matter how unicum you are, you're not a big threat in the Monarch to anyone.

 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-AP-]
Players
2,681 posts
6,497 battles
9 minutes ago, eliastion said:

TL/DR:

RNG was never a problem. The problem is that surface ships' perceived influence over the course of AA engagement is almost nil. It's actually much higher but that "much higher" isn't very high either. But lowering the interactivity from CV side as well does not solve the problem here.

The problem is that plane damage does nothing useful unless it results in dead planes.

 

If i get attacked by a midway, and i make all his planes go red, and he just recalls them, he hasn't lost anything at all.

 

Thats why the old system didnt work.

  • Cool 1
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[DPRK]
Beta Tester
298 posts

Thx for the Zombie BB buffs I always thought the heal on em is too weak.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[HOO]
Beta Tester, Players, In AlfaTesters
3,242 posts
1 hour ago, The_EURL_Guy said:

Update 0.8.6 brings the beginning of the French arc

GJJtpPn.png

  • Funny 12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[YEBOI]
Players
292 posts
8,515 battles

Why the Grozovoi nerf? Just out of curiosity?? 

 

If it’s become a popular DD in the past 6 months it’s because of the CV reeework! People pick Groz to have a better chance of surviving a CV attack, not because it has a 4 second(?) base reload!! People who want raw dakka play Harugumo or Khaba, not Grozovoi! 

 

If you look at wows numbers - Grozovoi is consistently middle/bottom half of the pack on all metrics: avg w/r, avg damage, avg PR and exp. Literally the only (!) metric where it outperforms other T10 DDs is plane kills (even that is mostly due to the fact that most captains spec BFT/AFT for main guns which gives added AA bonuses). But I can tell you from experience no amount of AA will save this ship from a dev strike by Midway/Haku/Auda and most T8 carriers. 

 

In a 1v1 gunfight Groz loses hands down to Harugumo, Khaba, IFHE Daring and Kitakaze on pure DPM. With a heal and legendary module! Kleber (with reload booster) will likely tear it apart as well! How is it “outperforming” again?

 

What “data” do you base your decisions on? Same “data” that told you the 8.5.0 AA rework was necessary? 

 

If Grozovoi gets a nerf - so must Harugumo and Kitakaze! The latter is literally brokenly OP for a ship that sees T7 action!! 

 

And when are you gonna show some love to mid tier prem DDs that have been powercrept out of existence? Leningrad and Blyska are crying for attention! 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
580 posts
2 hours ago, Isoruku_Yamamoto said:

0.8.6 announces yet another effective AA buff with respect to 0.8.5, even where the 0.8.5 buff was already extremely strong. 

This is the ninth announced CV nerf since 0.8.0, with 1 buff in between and 2 nerf mitigations. 

 

Perhaps it is time to stop nerfing CVs and instead rework the entire AA system in a proper manner. 

 

We don't want you to blanket nerf CVs anymore, which you have done nearly every update so far. Instead we want you to address specific issues that CV gameplay & counterplay cause, such as excessive CV damage against DDs, excessive spotting/ detection potential by the "planes spotted" indicator and the likes. 

 

Please, revert to the 0.8.4 AA and start work on a better AA system while also working on the other issues separately. The 0.8.5 and especially 0.8.6 AA systems fully go against everything you have ever intended with the CV rework. 

We? I can't remember that "we" made you to our representative. Speak for yourself.

 

The AA change in 0.8.5 was needed to make the system somewhat consistant. Took them way to long (6 month) to realise, that it's not possible to balance the RNG version. Now, they can at least start with the balancing.

 

More concerning for me: Yueyangs torpedo reload time is 14.7% longer than Gearings. With the update it will be 19.7% longer. WTH? Was the Yueyang really overperforming compared to the Gearing?!

  • Cool 2
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
171 posts
35 minutes ago, _DemonGuard_ said:

More concerning for me: Yueyangs torpedo reload time is 14.7% longer than Gearings. With the update it will be 19.7% longer. WTH? Was the Yueyang really overperforming compared to the Gearing?!

"X Yueyang's torpedo armament has been enhanced: the reload time of her torpedo tubes has been reduced from 156 to 146 seconds."....for the records.

 

Regards

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
6,058 posts
12,066 battles
3 hours ago, Isoruku_Yamamoto said:

Exactly. Even though right now i can fight off a midway in my fletcher. Soooo.... 

AA needs a full overhaul, or a revert imo.

That's because DD is already an OP class, second only to carriers (pre-8.5 that is :Smile-_tongue:).

I love my Jutland and will get the hang of my own Fletcher soon enough! :Smile_honoring:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[LUSOS]
Players
339 posts
19,980 battles
Quote

German cruisers IX Roon and X Hindenburg used to be inferior to other ships of the same type in terms of their overall battle efficiency, but now their guns have a faster reload time of 10.5 seconds instead of 11.

 

And I wonder why they used to be inferior... ah yes, because they were nerfed 2 years ago and everyone rantad about that then....

WOW. it only took this much time for you guys to notice it? Or were you hoping no one would remember that?

 

Quote

X Yueyang's torpedo armament has been enhanced: the reload time of her torpedo tubes has been reduced from 156 to 146 seconds.

No, this is a lie. It was nerfed last year and this time its you guys are going to make it up for the mistake and take back the slowing down on reload. So its not and enhance, its a mistake undoing.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[VL-NL]
[VL-NL]
Players
15 posts
4,577 battles

They been nerfing premium ships for a while Warspite already had a nerf for accuracy/armour and now there nerfing the whole top tier British battleship for no real reason. I mean maybe tier 9 and 10 but King George V and Duke of York have terrible firing angles and only 14inch guns and now they need an above water citadel!!! HMS nelson play style doesn't work on KGV or DoY.

 

How about nerfing the Russian paper battleships tier 6 & 7 with so much bow armour they would be submarines just run some calculation for surface area and armour thickness or at the very least the weight is so far forward there waterline would look like there sinking. There high chance of causing fire, decent speed which is unrealistic of design of 1912 & 1917 (16inch gun) respectively unless you are saying they could have been some how refitted in between the wars you can't have it both ways. The armour layouts are insane they need there armour reducing and repair party changing to a charge-less approach with longer cooldown and reduced speed comparable to ships design in that era.

 

Or just stop with the nerfing of stuff for a while.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
3,428 posts
4 hours ago, Karasu_Hidesuke said:

Er.. did I understand the bulletin wrong or are they now nerfing premium ships even?

Looks like it, worse than WoT's this is, time to offer real cash refunds for purchases made, just theft by deception if you ask me, and  know no one was.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
3,428 posts
3 hours ago, fightsteel said:

They been nerfing premium ships for a while Warspite already had a nerf for accuracy/armour and now there nerfing the whole top tier British battleship for no real reason. I mean maybe tier 9 and 10 but King George V and Duke of York have terrible firing angles and only 14inch guns and now they need an above water citadel!!! HMS nelson play style doesn't work on KGV or DoY.

 

How about nerfing the Russian paper battleships tier 6 & 7 with so much bow armour they would be submarines just run some calculation for surface area and armour thickness or at the very least the weight is so far forward there waterline would look like there sinking. There high chance of causing fire, decent speed which is unrealistic of design of 1912 & 1917 (16inch gun) respectively unless you are saying they could have been some how refitted in between the wars you can't have it both ways. The armour layouts are insane they need there armour reducing and repair party changing to a charge-less approach with longer cooldown and reduced speed comparable to ships design in that era.

 

Or just stop with the nerfing of stuff for a while.

I'm with the just stop nefing things camp.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TOXIC]
Players
4,786 posts
12,246 battles
9 hours ago, thiextar said:

The problem is that plane damage does nothing useful unless it results in dead planes.

 

If i get attacked by a midway, and i make all his planes go red, and he just recalls them, he hasn't lost anything at all.

 

Thats why the old system didnt work.

You might debate the balance but claiming that damaging without killing "does nothing useful" is clearly a false statement and your very own example shows it clearly. Just see what happened in the scenario you described:

You got attacked by a midway, you made all his planes go red and he just recalled them, avoiding losses. Right? Let me point you back to the important part: he recalled them. Forcing the enemy to disengage is a useful effect. You can dispute exactly how useful it is (it really depends on the situation, CV reserves and positioning of participants of the battle - it can range from negligible to game-deciding) but it's most definitely there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
187 posts
8,667 battles
13 hours ago, The_EURL_Guy said:

The Public Test server for Update 0.8.6 brings the beginning of the French arc, along with a number of balancing amendments! Be among the first to assess the changes!


Read it on the portal

How manny time to you battle with a Tirpitz against lower Tiers. ALMOST NEVER . ITS ALWAY THE STUPID TIER 9 AND TIER 10. SO WHAT CAN I DO WITH THIS CHANGE OF CALIBER

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
580 posts
17 hours ago, LonesomePolecat said:

"X Yueyang's torpedo armament has been enhanced: the reload time of her torpedo tubes has been reduced from 156 to 146 seconds."....for the records.

 

Regards

What do you want to tell me here? Maybe you should have read the whole article? I'm comparing Gearing and Yueyang, because they are quite similar. Yueyang is already worse than the Gearing and swinging the pendulum even more in the favor of the Gearing doesn't make sense to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[I-J-N]
Players
5,442 posts
3 hours ago, _DemonGuard_ said:

What do you want to tell me here? Maybe you should have read the whole article? I'm comparing Gearing and Yueyang, because they are quite similar. Yueyang is already worse than the Gearing and swinging the pendulum even more in the favor of the Gearing doesn't make sense to me.

 

Maybe WoWS NA is uhm... in need of a little encouragement?.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×