General CV related discussions.

[Gvozdika]

5 hours ago, BLUB__BLUB said:

Point: WeeGee has heard the complaint of DD-drivers, as such they have taken away the power of CV to kill DDs. 

They do not want CVs to go after DDs. That task must be done by the ships that do it when there is no CV: (radar)cruisers and other DDs.

Erm..... to be fair the 'nerf' to a CV's ability to attack DDs has basically been to require the CV player to aim a teensy weensy bit harder by leading moving targets. You know - like every other form of gunnery in the game? The actual damage-dealing is unchanged. The spotting of a DD and forcing them to bolt for cover/smoke up remains. The 'killing power' is still there and never went away.

 

As for the various complaints about the different classes being out of balance - that always was and likely always will be. The stereotypes will remain....

 

CVs - pretty much playing their own game trying to deal as much damage as possible. The 'team' is just some weird collection of dots on the minimap that shouts at them when they are particularly inept. Those pretty high numbers though! Shiny!

All other classes are at fault when they throw the game - because it cannot possibly be them.

 

BBs - seem to think that the max range of their guns is also the minimum range to which they should be near their intended targets. Exceptions to this are Tirpitz drivers - who seem to think that unless they are YOLO'ing after people to use their torps - they aren't true BB players.... All other classes are at fault when the game is lost.

 

CAs - usually getting into gunnery duels with BBs then wondering where all their health went in the space of 30s. Some of the smarter ones beach onto an island and sit there trying to bow-tank BB calibre fire. These usually last about 45s. Radar CAs usually try and YOLO into range to press the radar key then get deleted in about 15s. All other classes are at fault when this death occurs.

 

CLs - totally dumbfounded unless they can find an island to hump or create their own personal smokescreen. Usually spamming like merry hell at big, slow targets - rather than using their high ROF battery to actually shoot the DDs. Radar CLs usually suffer a similar rush of poop to the brain like their CA cousins. All other classes are at fault when it goes wrong.

 

DDs - seem to think that hurling themselves into a cap as soon as humanly possible is always the No.1 best option. Never mind that there are CVs in the game, or Radar, or particularly nasty DD-killing ships lurking around. Nope - got to get to that big circle ASAP! Usually found typing angrily in the chat 'NOOB TEAM - No support' upon their demise. All other classes are at fault.

 

I think that's everyone covered.....

 

The point is that these very same issues were here in Beta. They were here in RTS CVs. They are here now. They will be here in the future. The issue is that WG seem to lack any overall vision for their game beyond adding the next shiny toy - leading to a 'balance' that ping-pongs around pleasing nobody. 

 

 

[qtback]

after i took capitan skill Hidden Menace , everything went down, impossible to play, after drop planes move slow that they cant avoid anything while they lift, 95 % of planes dont return back, empty planes are slower then ones  with payloads, wg logic, awesome.

 

so my big planss about max cons with HM  ,csm and super module on my audacious went down, cv became broken, more i spent in con, more unplayble it becomes, i wasted so much time in it :(

[Miscommunication_dept]

35 minutes ago, qtback said:

after i took capitan skill Hidden Menace , everything went down, impossible to play, after drop planes move slow that they cant avoid anything while they lift, 95 % of planes dont return back, empty planes are slower then ones  with payloads, wg logic, awesome.

 

so my big planss about max cons with HM  ,csm and super module on my audacious went down, cv became broken, more i spent in con, more unplayble it becomes, i wasted so much time in it :(

I thought they were going to fix it  but here we are half a year later, I suppose it’s working as intended. 
 

4 points to nerf your carrier!

[BLUB__BLUB]

21 hours ago, Gvozdika said:

Erm..... to be fair the 'nerf' to a CV's ability to attack DDs has basically been to require the CV player to aim a teensy weensy bit harder by leading moving targets. You know - like every other form of gunnery in the game? The actual damage-dealing is unchanged. The spotting of a DD and forcing them to bolt for cover/smoke up remains. The 'killing power' is still there and never went away.

Well, if you compare it to that, a RED DOT should appear if a BB or CL aims for something.

And then a guaranteed 3.5 seconds to react... LOL. Anyway I'll be using the same method I always did.

Just torp them. Works great. 

 

[159Hunter]

1 hour ago, BLUB__BLUB said:

Well, if you compare it to that, a RED DOT should appear if a BB or CL aims for something.

You have skills for that:

- incoming fire alert ( which can easily give reaction times over 3.5 sec )

- priority target ( nobody targetting = noone shooting you , targetted = assume you are being shot at and take precautions )

[BLUB__BLUB]

1 hour ago, 159Hunter said:

You have skills for that:

- incoming fire alert ( which can easily give reaction times over 3.5 sec )

- priority target ( nobody targetting = noone shooting you , targetted = assume you are being shot at and take precautions )

Eh well, NONE of those are going to show:

- where it comes from and WHEN it is gonna hit ...or (most important) where it will land. 

 

Yes you get a warning for "incoming fire" from > 4,5 km. It will give you time to respond. 

But your response might be steering STRAIGHT INTO the shot... because you have no idea where it is going to come down.

ShouId I yell "DD babbies" or "DD-apologists" now? 

 

[159Hunter]

24 minutes ago, BLUB__BLUB said:

Eh well, NONE of those are going to show:

- where it comes from and WHEN it is gonna hit ...or (most important) where it will land. 

Where: So you want to assume that those shells are not aimed at your ship if you continue your current course and speed? 

When: as I told you, the warning is almost always longer than 3,5 sec, giving you more time to dodge than the rockets. 

24 minutes ago, BLUB__BLUB said:

Yes you get a warning for "incoming fire" from > 4,5 km. It will give you time to respond. 

But your response might be steering STRAIGHT INTO the shot... because you have no idea where it is going to come down.

If you lack situational awareness that might happen. The skill tells you when you are getting shot at. You should know who is shooting you. If you don't, you're just another brainless potato not using the skill to it's full potential.

Knowing who shot you when will help you dodge.

24 minutes ago, BLUB__BLUB said:

ShouId I yell "DD babbies" or "DD-apologists" now? 

CV apologist will do...

[Miscommunication_dept]

13 hours ago, qtback said:

after i took capitan skill Hidden Menace , everything went down, impossible to play, after drop planes move slow that they cant avoid anything while they lift, 95 % of planes dont return back, empty planes are slower then ones  with payloads, wg logic, awesome.

 

so my big planss about max cons with HM  ,csm and super module on my audacious went down, cv became broken, more i spent in con, more unplayble it becomes, i wasted so much time in it :(

 

Looks like Hidden menace is being fixed this patch:

Hidden Menace

• Bonus added: –50% to the height at which aircraft return to a carrier after an attack or upon pressing the F key. Squadrons will now soar up to a height where they are invulnerable to AA fire faster.

[BLUB__BLUB]

1 hour ago, 159Hunter said:

Where: So you want to assume that those shells are not aimed at your ship if you continue your current course and speed? 

That's not the point. Also, they could be aimed by a tater, or RNGesus loves you, and they miss you by a mile. 

Unless you turn straight into them. But it is exactly visible where the CV rockets are gonna hit.

 

1 hour ago, 159Hunter said:

When: as I told you, the warning is almost always longer than 3,5 sec, giving you more time to dodge than the rockets. 

Almost always, but sometimes not, and where are you going to divert the ship to? 

Maybe straight into it. A red dot woudl be needed if it were the same, and you know it.

 

1 hour ago, 159Hunter said:

If you lack situational awareness that might happen. The skill tells you when you are getting shot at. You should know who is shooting you. If you don't, you're just another brainless potato not using the skill to it's full potential.

Knowing who shot you when will help you dodge.

Doesn;t need help to dodge Cv rockets now, does it. 

They show exactly where rockets gonna land...

 

1 hour ago, 159Hunter said:

CV apologist will do...

Well if you lack situational awareness, you can still play DD against CVs... 

Game tells you exactly where you do not want to be in 3,5 seconds. 

No problems anymore even if you are total potato. 

[Andrewbassg]

Just a heads up pro Cv crowd. You were thrown under the bus. By the dev team :xD

 

2 hours ago, Moggytwo said:

 

Q19. Why do we get clan battle with 2 CVs allowed when the community not wanted them at all?

A19. Many of you have spoken out against the recent changes to the clan battles format. But the constant updating of clan battles gameplay is necessary to develop this mode. We understand your concerns about having two aircraft carriers on your team, but we assume this will not be an issue. In case this experiment proves unsuccessful, we will take appropriate measures. We regularly change the rules, format and maps of clan battles in order to add more variety to the team compositions and tactics used by players. Restrictions within the current season have been introduced for the same purpose. We don't think that 2 CVs on the team will be an issue or a universal choice this season. Despite the spotting capabilities and the relatively weak AA of the enemy ships at Tier VI, the CVs themselves don’t have the best attack potential. The overall influence of CVs on the outcome of the battle in the current format is not nearly as high as it is in Random Battles. The most important factor here is that at the Tier 6 mark, battleships are very powerful and have a huge impact on the battle results. Therefore, it might not be the best strategy to reduce the number of battleships on your team to add an aircraft carrier. So taking into account the fact that set ups with two aircraft carriers probably are not the best and there is an alternative choice, we believe that this is a good opportunity for players to expand their pool of ship picks while implementing new tactics. In addition, variation in gameplay and meta can have a positive effect on this type of battle. If, during the season, the statistics show that our expectations are not satisfied, we can quickly change the current restrictions - not only those on specific ships, but also ones on the number of ships of a certain class.

 Ups.

 

 

[DeviousDave02]

18 minutes ago, Andrewbassg said:

Just a heads up pro Cv crowd. You were thrown under the bus. By the dev team :xD

 

 Ups.

 

 

It's alright... Were just joining all the other good things under the Bus... LittleWhiteMouse, The part of the NA Dev team that gave a damn, Decent Gameplay... Operations...

 

By this point under the Bus is the place to be 

[Andrewbassg]

53 minutes ago, DeviousDave02 said:

It's alright... Were just joining all the other good things under the Bus... LittleWhiteMouse, The part of the NA Dev team that gave a damn, Decent Gameplay... Operations...

 

By this point under the Bus is the place to be 

Weell.....she didnt exactly argued that.....things.....were "fine and balanced' and....."fun and engaging" when they weren't, soooo...... I don't think so .

 

Besides, Weegee is still licking you, juuust.......not all over the place......

[159Hunter]

9 hours ago, BLUB__BLUB said:

That's not the point. Also, they could be aimed by a tater, or RNGesus loves you, and they miss you by a mile. 

Unless you turn straight into them. But it is exactly visible where the CV rockets are gonna hit.

It is the point though, you know you have ammunition incoming. From further away and with longer time. To offset longer time fame doesn't show where exactly.

9 hours ago, BLUB__BLUB said:

but sometimes not, and where are you going to divert the ship to? 

Maybe straight into it. A red dot woudl be needed if it were the same, and you know it.

No it isn't. But sure, let's ignore any skill into dodging cause that would be unfair for the average wows player

9 hours ago, BLUB__BLUB said:

Doesn;t need help to dodge Cv rockets now, does it. 

They show exactly where rockets gonna land...

And rockets were close to undodgable before this ( if CV player knew what he was doing ) and now players can react and have a good chance to dodge ( if they know what they are doing ).

So how come a)was okay and b) isn't?

Or maybe all this just shows that rockets just aren't balancable ?

9 hours ago, BLUB__BLUB said:

Well if you lack situational awareness, you can still play DD against CVs... 

And you will die if CV knows his tradecraft.

9 hours ago, BLUB__BLUB said:

Game tells you exactly where you do not want to be in 3,5 seconds. 

No problems anymore even if you are total potato. 

X for doubt. People do far more stupid things in this game.

[Yosha_AtaIante]

7 hours ago, Andrewbassg said:

Just a heads up pro Cv crowd. You were thrown under the bus. By the dev team :xD

 

 Ups.

 

 

I don't understand how this is the Pro CV crowd being thrown under the bus. 

 

[gabberworld]

On 8/8/2021 at 7:28 PM, Gvozdika said:

DDs - seem to think that hurling themselves into a cap as soon as humanly possible is always the No.1 best option. Never mind that there are CVs in the game, or Radar, or particularly nasty DD-killing ships lurking around. Nope - got to get to that big circle ASAP! Usually found typing angrily in the chat 'NOOB TEAM - No support' upon their demise. All other classes are at fault.

soo, like i understand correctly what you say is that dd should go camp with BBs?

 

don't get me wrong but i to seen this kind dd's before, i hope that you was not one off those

[Yosha_AtaIante]

19 minutes ago, gabberworld said:

soo, like i understand correctly what you say is that dd should go camp with BBs?

 

don't get me wrong but i to seen this kind dd's before, i hope that you was not one off those

no, he is saying that DDs should use their brain to determine when it's safe to enter a cap instead of insisting on cap because "THAT IS MY JOB AND YOU BETTER SUPPORT ME NOOB" 

[gabberworld]

6 minutes ago, Yosha_nai said:

no, he is saying that DDs should use their brain to determine when it's safe to enter a cap instead of insisting on cap because "THAT IS MY JOB AND YOU BETTER SUPPORT ME NOOB" 

play too safe is not solution either , but that is balance what player needs find out yourself

[CptBarney]

2 hours ago, Yosha_nai said:

I don't understand how this is the Pro CV crowd being thrown under the bus. 

 

Think he was saying the devs called the cv players dumb.

 

A big thonk from weegees.

[One_Eye_Potato]

I don't understand how players can defend the obviously broken Carrier mechanics or Wargaming can warrant at what's been going on at tier 4 for so long.  There are so many ships that have literally have no AA, it's a complete joke.  Tier 4 Carriers can't even drop fighters to support other ships like they can at other tiers.

 

Take the Hermes, I managed to get within main battery range of the this ship and watched as my 12inch shells bounced of her bow.  It just so happens I saw this exact thing happen again in one of Jingle's videos and he wasn't exactly enthused.  It's insulting.  I wouldn't have minded if she was a converted battlecruiser or something along those lines, but she wasn't and was the first ship to be designed from the outset as a carrier.  She isn't a Armoured Battleship and was never meant to be.

 

HE spam is no fun and I know when in a BB not to extinguish one fire or maybe even two, as the risk of being burnt down is too great.  I just let them burn and pop my repair party and it should negate one fire's worth of damage, but HE and CV's combined is too much, this is especially the case at tier 4 and in double CV matches, it is no fun.  On the flip side of this, Carrier players don't even have to worry about fires themsleves as their just auto extinguished for them, everything about them is just broken and they're no good for the game.

 

People say the old RTS was just as broken, well yes, in certain ways it was, but it took a lot more practice to master and fewer people played them, so it didn't make as much impact on the game and instead of nerfing some of those broken features Wargaming has introduced something that is far easier to master and is exploited by a greater number of players.  What's more the problems with the RTS system lay with individual ships and not the overall mechanics. At least then AA was more functional and CV's didn't have unlimited planes; now lost planes are replaced and ships AA is meaningless espeically at low tier.   Another point that is rarely raised is that the old RTS planes travelled much slower and had to make a return journey in which they could be lost to enemy fire,  this was again a far better system and seemed far more considered and sensible despite some it individual flaws.  

 

Look at what the carriers have to go up against,  there are ships present in tier 4 games that have literraly no AA.  For instance, the Kawachi in itself is a throwback to beta and has no AA at stock and nothing but a couple pop guns when upgraded.  It will barely do 20 knots in a straight line, can't turn for toffee and to top it off has a 10.9km main battery that won't hit diddly squat and your half dead before you're in range to try.  This ship and others like it have always been bad, but now they're literally a liability to a team.  The same goes for the Kuma, which is a great ship, but CV's love it as the rudder shift time is so slow a good CV player can easily torperdo it as the turning circle is so large and it's AA and fighter consumable are both worthless.

 

Players say, "Well you should stick together as your combined AA will defeat enemy aircraft", well it doesn't work because generally there isn't enough combined AA available to do that and the differences in speed are too great that people get left behind, in fact the only ships that have any credible AA are the Carriers themslves.  What's more, this imbalance detracts from strategic gameplay and reinforces the dreaded 'lemming train' mentality, which isn't exactly the ideal tactic in domination mode, where there are multiple caps. What's more, this 'mentality' is then 'learnt' and carried forward into higher tiers where you can't afford to do that and idividual thinking is required to win games. 

 

I've heard the arguement "Well they're are equal carriers per side",  this maybe be so, but if you have a new player on one side and a veteran on the other it just accentuates the imbalances and makes the experience even more frustrating.

 

New players are given protected match making and to suddenly find yourself in a stock ship, with no AA and minimal captain skills is no fun, it's just frustating and not a good way to hold onto players.

[Andrewbassg]

3 hours ago, Yosha_nai said:

I don't understand how this is the Pro CV crowd being thrown under the bus. 

 

Oh its simple. One of the pro Cv champs main recurring argument was that Cv's are not that influential. Yet.....

 

The overall influence of CVs on the outcome of the battle in the current format is not nearly as high as it is in Random Battles

 

Note "overall influence", "high" "Cv" and " random battles" used in the same sentence.

 

Sooo.....bye bye argument :)

[Yosha_AtaIante]

28 minutes ago, Andrewbassg said:

Oh its simple. One of the pro Cv champs main recurring argument was that Cv's are not that influential. Yet.....

 

The overall influence of CVs on the outcome of the battle in the current format is not nearly as high as it is in Random Battles

 

Note "overall influence", "high" "Cv" and " random battles" used in the same sentence.

 

Sooo.....bye bye argument :)

Oh, I don't think anyone denies CVs having low influence though

[Andrewbassg]

17 minutes ago, Yosha_nai said:

Oh, I don't think anyone denies CVs having low influence though

Oh, but dat is not what they say...:)

 

And you would be surprised :) Wows world isn't consist in only EU....

[Gvozdika]

4 hours ago, gabberworld said:

soo, like i understand correctly what you say is that dd should go camp with BBs?

 

don't get me wrong but i to seen this kind dd's before, i hope that you was not one off those

As my esteemed co-forumite @Yosha_nai has answered before - it means there is nuance to playing a DD that goes far beyond mashing the W key, aiming at the red team and expecting good things to happen. 

 

Scenario 1 - The enemy has a CV roaming around with rocket planes expressly looking for you, you suspect there is a Daring somewhere ahead of you backed up by a Des Moines who is well within radar range of the cap you intend to go to. Now you can of course wander into that cap - after all that's what DDs are supposed to do right? - and you'll probably have about 10s to regret your life choices before getting microwaved, rocketed and shot to bits in that particular order. 

 

OR 

 

You can do something else (spot, torpedo lobbing, work towards another cap, whatever) until that particular cap is a bit safer and/or less likely to send you back to port for your troubles. You are a sweet Fudge-All good to your team if you get yourself killed in the first minutes of the game and indeed a DD becomes progressively more important as the game goes on as radar gets used up / taken out and the rocket mafia find other things to do. It doesn't mean camping. It doesn't mean yoloing. It means using a bit of common sense to keep yourself useful and in the fight.

 

Some DDs have good reasons to go nowhere near the caps early on - French ones being a good example. Their strengths lie in skirmishing rather than charging headlong into a fight they likely won't win.

 

This dynamic changes of course if there isn't a CV around. It changes depending on the number of radars and where they happen to be on the map. It changes depending on the kind of DDs that you are up against. It even changes based on specific ships you may or may meet. I'm not going anywhere near a cap if I know there's a T7 Belfast lurking around - for example. I'll be someplace else! 

 

I hope that expands my meaning a bit more. I don't think any of the above is unreasonable behaviour for a DD driver. 

 

[Camperdown]

1 hour ago, One_Eye_Potato said:

I don't understand how players can defend the obviously broken Carrier mechanics or Wargaming can warrant at what's been going on at tier 4 for so long.  There are so many ships that have literally have no AA, it's a complete joke.  Tier 4 Carriers can't even drop fighters to support other ships like they can at other tiers.

 

Take the Hermes, I managed to get within main battery range of the this ship and watched as my 12inch shells bounced of her bow.  It just so happens I saw this exact thing happen again in one of Jingle's videos and he wasn't exactly enthused.  It's insulting.  I wouldn't have minded if she was a converted battlecruiser or something along those lines, but she wasn't and was the first ship to be designed from the outset as a carrier.  She isn't a Armoured Battleship and was never meant to be.

 

HE spam is no fun and I know when in a BB not to extinguish one fire or maybe even two, as the risk of being burnt down is too great.  I just let them burn and pop my repair party and it should negate one fire's worth of damage, but HE and CV's combined is too much, this is especially the case at tier 4 and in double CV matches, it is no fun.  On the flip side of this, Carrier players don't even have to worry about fires themsleves as their just auto extinguished for them, everything about them is just broken and they're no good for the game.

 

People say the old RTS was just as broken, well yes, in certain ways it was, but it took a lot more practice to master and fewer people played them, so it didn't make as much impact on the game and instead of nerfing some of those broken features Wargaming has introduced something that is far easier to master and is exploited by a greater number of players.  What's more the problems with the RTS system lay with individual ships and not the overall mechanics. At least then AA was more functional and CV's didn't have unlimited planes; now lost planes are replaced and ships AA is meaningless espeically at low tier.   Another point that is rarely raised is that the old RTS planes travelled much slower and had to make a return journey in which they could be lost to enemy fire,  this was again a far better system and seemed far more considered and sensible despite some it individual flaws.  

 

Look at what the carriers have to go up against,  there are ships present in tier 4 games that have literraly no AA.  For instance, the Kawachi in itself is a throwback to beta and has no AA at stock and nothing but a couple pop guns when upgraded.  It will barely do 20 knots in a straight line, can't turn for toffee and to top it off has a 10.9km main battery that won't hit diddly squat and your half dead before you're in range to try.  This ship and others like it have always been bad, but now they're literally a liability to a team.  The same goes for the Kuma, which is a great ship, but CV's love it as the rudder shift time is so slow a good CV player can easily torperdo it as the turning circle is so large and it's AA and fighter consumable are both worthless.

 

Players say, "Well you should stick together as your combined AA will defeat enemy aircraft", well it doesn't work because generally there isn't enough combined AA available to do that and the differences in speed are too great that people get left behind, in fact the only ships that have any credible AA are the Carriers themslves.  What's more, this imbalance detracts from strategic gameplay and reinforces the dreaded 'lemming train' mentality, which isn't exactly the ideal tactic in domination mode, where there are multiple caps. What's more, this 'mentality' is then 'learnt' and carried forward into higher tiers where you can't afford to do that and idividual thinking is required to win games. 

 

I've heard the arguement "Well they're are equal carriers per side",  this maybe be so, but if you have a new player on one side and a veteran on the other it just accentuates the imbalances and makes the experience even more frustrating.

 

New players are given protected match making and to suddenly find yourself in a stock ship, with no AA and minimal captain skills is no fun, it's just frustating and not a good way to hold onto players.

2 CVs per team at T4 is simply criminal and I can't understand why WG insists on continuing it 

[Yosha_AtaIante]

5 minutes ago, Andrewbassg said:

Oh, but dat is not what they say...

sorry I misworded. I wanted to say high influence. I thought of low influence while typing and didn't double check