General CV related discussions.

[anonym_h2A7Pq9RjcIx]

What I don't understand about this game and other Wargaming titles, is that the games they create are more or less balanced when they are first released and then gradually become increasingly less so as time goes on.  I find this really odd, as other developers try to streamline their games to cater both for their existing playerbase and those who are new. 

 

Obviously, I'm unhappy about the CV rework and am of the opinion that it totally undermines what I considered to be a once great game.

 

Anyway, I refuse to pay money for an experience that is no longer fun and is, for the most part, just frustating.

[Capra76]

36 minutes ago, Fellatio_Nelson said:

What I don't understand about this game and other Wargaming titles, is that the games they create are more or less balanced when they are first released and then gradually become increasingly less so as time goes on. 

 

Monetisation and the f2p game model:

• start with a fun game, lots of free stuff, little or no p2w and payment largely optional, use this time to bring players in;
• after about 18 months the game has got most of the players it will get so begin to ramp up the monetisation, make "free" stuff much harder to obtain, events become grind-fests unless you're willing to pay to skip, older vehicle lines end up being powercrept by the newest must have releases;
• over time the p2w becomes more obvious and the game becomes much more hostile for the f2p players who begin to drift away;
• player numbers begin to dwindle and eventually the game dies.

[Deckeru_Maiku]

1 hour ago, Capra76 said:

 

Monetisation and the f2p game model:

• start with a fun game, lots of free stuff, little or no p2w and payment largely optional, use this time to bring players in;
• after about 18 months the game has got most of the players it will get so begin to ramp up the monetisation, make "free" stuff much harder to obtain, events become grind-fests unless you're willing to pay to skip, older vehicle lines end up being powercrept by the newest must have releases;
• over time the p2w becomes more obvious and the game becomes much more hostile for the f2p players who begin to drift away;
• player numbers begin to dwindle and eventually the game dies.

None of that explains why WG f*cks up their game with stuff like the CV reework, which not exactly made them a fortune from selling CVs (I guess...) but drove quite a few players away from the game....

The captain reeework on the other hand is pure P2W.. or rather P2P(lay a bit like before we crapped on your opinions about if a captain skill reeework was needed, except for money...)

[Sunleader]

1 hour ago, Capra76 said:

 

 make "free" stuff much harder to obtain, events become grind-fests unless you're willing to pay to skip,

 

<---- Looks at new Italian BB Directives.

 

Win 1 Match.

Destroy 9 Ships

Earn 350 Ribbons of any Kind

Deal 650k Damage

 

<--- Finished the First Directive being barely Halfway through his Daily Missions....

 

 

I mean. Dont get me Wrong.

They did Definitively Scale down Free Stuff.

They also Definitively Scaled up Monetisation.

 

But that with the Grindfest is more of a thing thanks to Puerto Rico Dumpster Fire still hanging over them like a Black Shadow.

I mean. I guess I am not Surprised. I even Said it back then that this Puerto Rico Rubbish will Haunt them for Months and maybe even Years and will be Rubbed in their Face a Million Times over.

But still. This is not a Grindfest xD

 

I am Playing like 20 Coop Games a Week and I am easily Managing this Event....

[Sunleader]

6 minutes ago, Deckeru_Maiku said:

None of that explains why WG f*cks up their game with stuff like the CV reework, which not exactly made them a fortune from selling CVs (I guess...) but drove quite a few players away from the game....

The captain reeework on the other hand is pure P2W.. or rather P2P(lay a bit like before we crapped on your opinions about if a captain skill reeework was needed, except for money...)

 

Because of the Opposite of what he Said is True.

WG has by far not given up on Gaining New Players.

WG Wants New Players. Players from Different Pools than the Guys that want to Shoot Big Guns on Battleships.

 

Hence. Aircraft Carriers and Soon Submarines.

The Big Hope was that Aircraft Carrier Rework would Attract New Players for Aircraft Carriers from the Community that Sees Flying Planes.

Submarines are the same.

Submarines will be Implemented because they are an Feature that Thousands of People asked for.

Thousands of People which are not currently in the Game because the Game only had Shooty Shooty Boats.

 

And WG is Hoping that they will get alot of these People to Join the Game by Implementing Submarines.

 

Success is of course a Different Story.

But thats the Plan at least.

 

 

 

Also. How is Captain Rework P2P ?

I havnt Spend a Cent on this.

Yeah Sure I can get more Elite Exp. But why would I bother.

I have to Retrain Captains anyways to move em Around. So I will just Stay with my 200 or so Captains as Each Ship has its own Captain.

Dont see how that should Encourage someone to Pay more than before.

[anonym_h2A7Pq9RjcIx]

The CV rework changes the whole nature of the game and attracts a different kind of player, one that is different to the original core group that existed before.  Besides that, many of the ships that new players want to play are underpowered and were suited to early an earlier meta and a long gone play style; there are people from all over the world who would like to play their nations' ships and will find them to unviable.  

 

Concealment, tactics and communication are a thing of the past, most new players seem totally oblivious of games objectives or even what constitutes a win.

 

Regardless of tier, or other mitigating factors, each game just seems to revolve around an incohrent mass, making a beeline for the enemy carrier(s) and invariably dying in the process.  Each game seems to end with CV's deciding the outcome, it's so predictable and boring.  This seems to be a fact regardless of what ship you play, whether they be premium or just those found in the tech tree.  As for submarines, I have no doubt they will be as overpowered as carriers currently are and all they will do is annoy the present player group who are having a whale of a time in the current meta.

 

The game is a total mess in my humble opinion and even if it does attract new players, I doubt very much whether they will remain as loyal to the game as those who originally supported it.  It's really sad, there is nothing to stop Wargaming from making a balanced game, introducing new content and profiting from it.  I honestly don't understand and like I said before, I am no longer willing to part with my money for an experience such as this.

[Deckeru_Maiku]

4 hours ago, Fellatio_Nelson said:

Each game seems to end with CV's deciding the outcome, it's so predictable and boring.

At least at medium tiers - 5 to 7 - the quality of the team has a lot more influence on the outcome of the battle than the CV.

I'm not a really good CV player. But even though I sometimes manage to achieve interesting results with several sunk opposing ships and lots of spotting - just to see my allied get decimated faster than I could even send out planes out. And they don't fall to the enemy CV, but to opposing surface ships and their own dumbness or lack of ability.

Had today a battle with me sinking 5 enemy ships and  146k damage done, which still only resulted in a loss, as my "team" just yolo'd happily into their death...

 

So yeah, reeworked CVs are bad for the meta and the game. And yeah, they have the ability to be OP (when in the right hands and when accompanied with a team of not totally potatoes), but they are not usually able to win every battle on their own. Which is of course made sure by having CVs on both teams and usually the battle ending not in a draw, making at least one CV losing the battle. But yes, the skill of the CV player helps in deciding the outcome of the battle. And because the power of CVs the skillgap between the CV captains has more influence on the outcome of the battle, than maybe the skillgap between two DD players in a battle with three DDs per time.

 

But THE deciding factor for the outcome of a battle is the skill of all 24 players in the battle... which sometimes is horribly low, even as far veteran players with thousands of battles are concerned.

[SodaBubbles]

Had four matches today, two fun ones at T4. Two helpings of double CV crapfests. Thanks devs! I quit after the second of those garbage matches. Why should I play the game of developers who could care less about the playerbase?

 

I play to have fun and relax a bit. If I wanted to be a target drone, I can go down and stand in the middle of the busy street by my house. 





 

[FellRaven]

15 hours ago, Sunleader said:

 

Submarines will be Implemented because they are an Feature that Thousands of People asked for.

Thousands of People which are not currently in the Game because the Game only had Shooty Shooty Boats.

 

And WG is Hoping that they will get alot of these People to Join the Game by Implementing Submarines.

 

Far Far more people DO NOT want submarines to ever be introduced, introducing Submarines into Random is likely to kill the game.

[Sunleader]

11 minutes ago, FellRaven said:

Far Far more people DO NOT want submarines to ever be introduced, introducing Submarines into Random is likely to kill the game.

 

And I guess you can Provide me with the Accurate Statistics and Empirical Data to Back this Statement up ?

Because I somehow dont seem to find that Data.

 

 

[Lordcrafty]

11 hours ago, Fellatio_Nelson said:

Each game seems to end with CV's deciding the outcome, it's so predictable and boring.

honestly speaking, with the  playerbase CVs don't actually have that much of an impact in your average game, hence why they're balanced according to weegee. The number of CV players I see with sub 55% WRs, they're not impacting the battle any more than a surface ship player with the same WR. Of course that's still pretty awful game design, but it doesn't decide every match.

[El2aZeR]

PSA: I believe the latest change to flak extended its lifespan by at least a few seconds, meaning it is now much harder to speed juke than before.

[Lordcrafty]

2 minutes ago, El2aZeR said:

PSA: I believe the latest change to flak extended its lifespan by at least a few seconds, meaning it is now much harder to speed juke than before.

I'm going to pin my recent underperformance on this.

[Deckeru_Maiku]

16 hours ago, Sunleader said:

Also. How is Captain Rework P2P ?

I havnt Spend a Cent on this.

Yeah Sure I can get more Elite Exp. But why would I bother.

I have to Retrain Captains anyways to move em Around. So I will just Stay with my 200 or so Captains as Each Ship has its own Captain.

Dont see how that should Encourage someone to Pay more than before.

 

Yeah, YOU will still with those 200 captains. Other players - especially newer players - don't have that many captains and probably will want to move their captains to the next silver ship they manage to unlock, and to play as before (= with working skills) they probably use Dubloons... and then notice that the skills they chose for the T5 ship won't work good for the T6 ship... so more Dubloons for the reskill.

Yes, it's not Pay2Play at all... but it's Pay2Play as effective as You are used to... Sure doesn't veteran players with millions of Captain Exp lying around, but these probably are not the target group for this captain skill reeework anyway

 

1 hour ago, Sunleader said:

 

And I guess you can Provide me with the Accurate Statistics and Empirical Data to Back this Statement up ?

Because I somehow dont seem to find that Data.

 

Seems WG has such data, considering how vehemently they don't push implementation of Subs recently. How long since the last appearance of subs on any form of test server? Looks to me that they learned that the market share of players probably being ready to spend money on subs isn't worth putting too much designer hours into this (ad)venture.

Which I would be quite happy about.

[FellRaven]

8 hours ago, Sunleader said:

 

And I guess you can Provide me with the Accurate Statistics and Empirical Data to Back this Statement up ?

Because I somehow dont seem to find that Data.

 

 

Say the person claiming thousands of people wanted them.

 

[Ashardalon_Dragnipur]

7 hours ago, El2aZeR said:

PSA: I believe the latest change to flak extended its lifespan by at least a few seconds, meaning it is now much harder to speed juke than before.

cant you just speed up instead of slow down?

[Pururut]

Just had a lovely match in the Kotovsky. There I was happily kiting away from a flank of teammates in the form of  Nurnbergs going broadside against battleships and an Aigle trying to 1v2 against a Murmansk and Visby. A Dunkerque was chasing me but it was alright; I was keeping him at around 14-15km and happily dodging most of his shells with the remainder mostly being overpens with the occasional citadel deck bounce penetration. Their CV did the most logical decision and started focusing me with torpedoes.

 

Now what exactly am I supposed to do; Eat his torpedoes at least for 3 passes out of 4 given the ships abyssmal AA or dodge his torpedo bombers and expose 30mm angled citadel and allow Dunkerque to delete me? Well I suppose I should have seen into the future and expected our flank to suicide leaving no combined AA to at least mitigate CV effectiveness alas I cant. It was literally choosing whether if the CV or the BB gets a number next to their name at that point.

 

Another case; Mutsuki in a tier 6 match. Did decent enough by denying two equal tiered destroyers the middle cap and then kept the enemy battleships in C at bay with some torpedoes. It is going all well until their Ranger comes and detects me  despite the AA and secondaries being off and all. I turn and make sure that he is approaching me directly from the side to minimize his chance of scoring a hit. He dives, releases it at and all three bombs magically converge on the mid section deleting the remaining 6k HP that I have. I guess I should have smoked but how am I supposed use that which didnt exist since the game was already in the last 5 minutes. 

 

CV is truly working in this game as intended and as it was historically; deleting anything and everything with sufficient time and skill or luck. That is all nice and all but it really hits a nerve when you are on the recieving side with nothing to defend yourself with in a reasonable manner. Either remove them from the game or introduce carrier deck as a module that can be damaged and destroyed. That way at least CVs can focus a bit more on each other for the first few minutes and leave the remaining classes to their own affairs for a bit. 

[guy_incognito79]

2 hours ago, Pururut said:

Now what exactly am I supposed to do; Eat his torpedoes at least for 3 passes out of 4 given the ships abyssmal AA or dodge his torpedo bombers and expose 30mm angled citadel and allow Dunkerque to delete me? Well I suppose I should have seen into the future and expected our flank to suicide leaving no combined AA to at least mitigate CV effectiveness alas I cant. It was literally choosing whether if the CV or the BB gets a number next to their name at that point.

 

 

If that had been me it would've been an easy choice... turn and give the kill to the Dunk  who at least had the balls to charge you and fight properly. Any time a situation like that arises, I always let the guy in the proper ship have the point, not the sh!tter camping at the very back and rolling his face across the keyboard to 'win'.

 

[Nov_A]

Where to find Unicum CV footage? Preferably solo Shokek, YouTube and Twitch offer little to nothing, Replays are bugged beyond madness anyways.

[Nibenay78]

13 hours ago, guy_incognito79 said:

If that had been me it would've been an easy choice... turn and give the kill to the Dunk  who at least had the balls to charge you and fight properly. Any time a situation like that arises, I always let the guy in the proper ship have the point, not the sh!tter camping at the very back and rolling his face across the keyboard to 'win'.

 

I agree, if you are about to die anyway, dont give the kill to the skyrats who poop on you.

[Capra76]

2 hours ago, Nov_A said:

Where to find Unicum CV footage? Preferably solo Shokek, YouTube and Twitch offer little to nothing, Replays are bugged beyond madness anyways.

 

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=el2azer

 

[guy_incognito79]

37 minutes ago, Capra76 said:

 

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=el2azer

 

While I know he is one of the top 5 EU (possibly NA & RU as well) CV players and he has a deep understanding of all the mechanics of 'CV gameplay' what this dude can do with those pidgeons is downright disgusting!! 

[Excavatus]

49 minutes ago, guy_incognito79 said:

While I know he is one of the top 5 EU (possibly NA & RU as well) CV players and he has a deep understanding of all the mechanics of 'CV gameplay' what this dude can do with those pidgeons is downright disgusting!! 

and we all wish and work to reach the same level... :P

[LordBodoM]

I know we are not supposed to complain but i'm gonna do it anyway:

 

1)  In most cases squadrons can only attack once. Most of the remaining planes will not survive while turning and lining up for a second attack. If you don't want to be without planes, 5 minutes in the game, you have to pre-drop.

Having to pre-drop is ridiculous so either: A) Give planes more HP or B) Make squadrons adjustable in size. If i want to attack with 4 planes why force me to launch 8?

 

2) Torpede bombers have a rather long attack run. Often a target is destroyed the second you start your run. There is no way to cancel that run so you have to drop anyway or keep flying. Dropping anyway can cause problems if friendlies are near. Keep on flying may result in the destruction of your planes when enemies are not in range of your attack run but AA or fighters are in range. Please make it possible to interrupt an attack.

 

3) Bomb dispersion is erratic at best. Even when you have a perfect allignment and drop when the reticle is at it's smallest, they miss too often. Sometimes it seems ships have a magnetic embrella that makes your bombs go nicely left and right of your target. When you have to actively maneuvre when AA is strong (all the time these days) they drop all over the place. Same with rockets. Trying to hit something at the end of a turn or anywhere near an island is wishfull thinking.

Only when, for example, a battleship is sailing alone and in a straight line and doesn't have massive AA and doesn't have fighters deployed, you can make a decent hit and still have some planes to take home afterwards. Hitting an actively maneuvering DD? Lol! Please make drop patterns a bit more consistent. Maybe even introduce a skill or module to improve the accuracy?

 

4) " There are upper limits on the percentages of battle tiers a ship will be sent to " -> For T8 CV's this means 10% same tier and 90% Tier 10? The amount of matches i'm confronted with Halland's, Minotaur's and other no-fly zones with a T8 CV is exceptionally high. Please either: A) Lower the amount of times this happens or B) Give planes more HP, T8 planes are not equipped to confront T10 AA.

 

5) Planes, no matter how big or how many, have an overall detection range of 10Km (Ex Jap TB), adjustable to 9Km with the concealment module. The CE skill has been replaced (lol) with 'Hidden Menace' wich only affects the carrier and is probably the worst CV skill ever. Spending 4 pts on this results in an assured loss of all remaining planes when they try to head home. The name and discription of the skill insinuates your carrier is harder to find and not to make your pilots demented after they drop their ordenance. Please adjust the skill so that their speed gets reduced AFTER they reach height.

 

6) Speaking of concealment: The respective detection ranges are as silly as a cross-eyed eagle. For example: A Kagero can spot a Lexington's planes at 10Km (or 9) but the planes can not even see the dd untill they are on top of them (2.5Km).

Ships on the other hand can spot said DD at 5.5Km. There was me thinking that elevation increases viewing range...Not! In this logic a pilot can more than double his viewing range by crashing his plane in the ocean and continue in his dinky.

 

7) Another issue is the fact that (taking the Kag & Lex as Ex) the distance from attack planes to their reticle is LONGER than the airial detection range of the DD. 3Km and 2.5Km respectively. This means you'd have to start the attack run BEFORE you can even spot the DD (if he is not spotted by another teammate or firing). You can counter this a little by slowing down your planes but that's very limited in time and the DD player has to be a doofus, sailing in a straight line.

 

 

Conclusion:

- Give planes more HP (NOT the FDR!!!);

- Make canceling an attack run possible;

- Improve dispersion;

- Improve MM;

- Adjust Air Detection Range (glasses for pilots?);

- Fix island problem (they mess up aim vs drop).

 

Other minor issues:

- Sometimes there is a very slight delay when launching rockets after the reticle went green. Probably after turning or when an island is closer than +/- 2Km.

- Fighters often get destroyed before deployment. The message 'Fighters Destroyed' even comes before 'Fighters Deployed'.

- AA score is wonky. Ex: Halland = 85 and GK = 88. According to it's firepower the Halland should have 99 or, perhaps more acurate: 1099...

- Where does the continuous DMG form the Halland come from anyway, all it has are Bofors. Flak ok but the invisable railguns??

 

PS: Only constructive criticism please. DD-players need not to respond. I have been called [edited] more than enough and we don't have infinite planes. I'm not mentioning the fact that DD's are packed bow to stern with torps either.

[El2aZeR]

54 minutes ago, LordBodoM said:

Only constructive criticism please.

 

Kay. Here you go: