General CV related discussions.

[Pikkozoikum]

12 hours ago, BLUB__BLUB said:

Seriously. Some of the suggestions would indeed make it worse. But really. For example the spotting. 

I had (in my opinion of course) a very good suggestion for spotting. But it was very hard to explain and understand the suggestion, while the gameplay was complex but simple at the same time. Just to explain the whole idea was too complex xD

My suggestion would solve the spotting issue, would even make DDs and CLs to anti-CV-spotting ships, instead of being victims.

But also granted more tactical elements for competitive plays

In my opinion a very good idea, but as I said, the explanation was too complex to understand.

[BLUB__BLUB]

7 hours ago, 1MajorKoenig said:

Excellent example of pure idiocy.

It is not. Why should ships be spotted to everyone? 

Let them be spotted just by the ones they can shoot (their own firing range). 

NOW they are spotted by ships that they cannot even fire back at.

Rest gets minimap spot.  

 

8 hours ago, 1MajorKoenig said:

The WOWS community is mostly comprised of old farts who don’t give a damn about competitive 

True. I am one of those BTW, but I can see the annoyance of a CV, even if I play those myself as well.

 

 

[winstonsmith]

Feedback:

The Attack Planes changes are HORRIBLE.

it is just BAD. Just change them back.

 

 

Why?

Rendering HE atk Planes useless Vs DD's. Making DD's even stronger.

Even when u manage to hit a DD with Dive bombers, AP bombs do no damage.

 

also:

at lvl 4 CV's are too strong.

at lvl 6 they have been in a very good spot bevore the atk plane change.

at lvl 8 .... i do not even play them there anymore.

 

until then, guess i play another Game :)

[1MajorKoenig]

1 hour ago, BLUB__BLUB said:

It is not.

It is 

 

1 hour ago, BLUB__BLUB said:

NOW they are spotted by ships that they cannot even fire back at.

Exactly the same for any unit in the game. You want to change it for all Ships?

 

1 hour ago, BLUB__BLUB said:

Rest gets minimap spot.  

As said an excellent example for a very stupid mechanic

 

1 hour ago, BLUB__BLUB said:

True. I am one of those BTW, but I can see the annoyance of a CV, even if I play those myself as well.

Which is mostly due to WG’s “fantastic” AA design to be precise… 

[TsunamiACR]

Really, the autopilot is very bad you have to change it because that of dialing and the aircraft carrier accelerating and deleting the command is horrible and several clans annoyed me that problem

[Samyuel]

If planes can only show ships on the minimap, ships in smoke should only be able to see ships on the minimap when they are hiding in there smokes. They shouldn't be able to perfectly see outside their smoke just because someone else see the target.

 

Sounds great right ?

 

[Nibenay78]

5 hours ago, 1MajorKoenig said:

Exactly the same for any unit in the game. You want to change it for all Ships?

Like practical immunity to fire, flooding and detonations...

[1MajorKoenig]

7 hours ago, Nibenay78 said:

Like practical immunity to fire, flooding and detonations...

Err.. nope

 

But if you deny it or not - WG will show us what they want to change with regards to CV spotting anyway. That doesn’t of course mean that anyone will appreciate it - could go either way but let’s see dude 

[Nibenay78]

1 hour ago, 1MajorKoenig said:

Err.. nope

 

But if you deny it or not - WG will show us what they want to change with regards to CV spotting anyway. That doesn’t of course mean that anyone will appreciate it - could go either way but let’s see dude 

Oh I'm VERY sure WG will show us regardless if we like it or not. About either way - despite being very vocal about the rework, I was very ambient about it when it came and I didn't voice my opinion until about 5-6 months into the crapshow, when it became clear this is how they want it, and it won't change much from now on.

[lovelacebeer]

Has anyone seen the Pacific War mission that drops if you choose the USA side? I think some how this might be beyond me.

[El2aZeR]

21 hours ago, 1MajorKoenig said:

As said an excellent example for a very stupid mechanic

 

One basic question.

Why exactly would that be a stupid mechanic?

[Samyuel]

1 hour ago, lovelacebeer said:

Has anyone seen the Pacific War mission that drops if you choose the USA side? I think some how this might be beyond me.

Very easily doable in coop. Bot planes usually go in straight line and eat all the flaks possible/ trigger any fighters they come across.

[lovelacebeer]

8 minutes ago, Samyuel said:

Very easily doable in coop. Bot planes usually go in straight line and eat all the flaks possible/ trigger any fighters they come across.

True now how do I guarantee it’s me the bot CV flys over?

[Samyuel]

1 minute ago, lovelacebeer said:

True now how do I guarantee it’s me the bot CV flys over?

If you play CV you can go where the planes are to drop fighters and focus on onl;y that.
If you play surface ships it will be luck I guess. But depending on your playing hours ther ewill be more or less players so if you have a fast ship it should help. But will be way harder

[lovelacebeer]

10 minutes ago, Samyuel said:

If you play CV you can go where the planes are to drop fighters and focus on onl;y that.
If you play surface ships it will be luck I guess. But depending on your playing hours ther ewill be more or less players so if you have a fast ship it should help. But will be way harder

So back to my original point I think this mission might well be beyond me but thank you for your input. 

[Capra76]

45 minutes ago, lovelacebeer said:

So back to my original point I think this mission might well be beyond me but thank you for your input. 

 

I don't think it's a one game only task is it?

[lovelacebeer]

Just now, Capra76 said:

 

I don't think it's a one game only task is it?

12 days apparently, but I wasn’t planning on playing that much CO OP in the dubious hope of a bot CV focusing me 

[1MajorKoenig]

3 hours ago, El2aZeR said:

 

One basic question.

Why exactly would that be a stupid mechanic?

Because it is completely different compared to the other classes, removes collaboration between CVs and team and is potentially even pretty confusing if player A sees different stuff than player B. Plus the other way round — does the CV see what his team mates spot?

 

In general it is not wise to create separate mechanics for such a basic topic. It would be like creating different mechanics for damage stuff for one particular class. Counterintuitive

[El2aZeR]

1 hour ago, 1MajorKoenig said:

Because it is completely different compared to the other classes, removes collaboration between CVs and team and is potentially even pretty confusing if player A sees different stuff than player B. Plus the other way round — does the CV see what his team mates spot?

 

CV play is already its own isolated minigame with its own rules and mechanics so that's completely out of the window.

Collaboration between CVs and the team is already practically nonexistent, removing spotting would make CVs more balanced, sacrificing what little teamplay there is left is worth it.

It would only be confusing for people who are braindead and for those everything is confusing, thus can be neglected.

 

1 hour ago, 1MajorKoenig said:

In general it is not wise to create separate mechanics for such a basic topic. It would be like creating different mechanics for damage stuff for one particular class. Counterintuitive

 

CVs in a nutshell.

[mtm78]

On 8/31/2021 at 2:39 PM, Samyuel said:

Yeah a head designer or something said years ago during alpha said there are no submarines (at the moment in this release) because they are invisible and dead the second they surface.

Since then you have tons of radar, hydros and they implemented tools to develop and fight submarines.

 

No you poor uninformed soul. 

 

Lesta stated that, after lengthy discussions with the community and internal debates. Not because they are invisible and vulnerable the moment they are spotted, this is exactly the same as destroyers were back then so that's not all the main reason. The main reason is: they don't fit the gameplay. Meaning they don't fit the existing class interactions. They don't even fit the same game 'reality' since all other classes have fixed real life relative base speed, and only submarines break this constant sometimes by a factor of 300. A submerged WWII submarine does 9kts, not close to triple that speed and had no magic torpedo's with iff built in ( we're talking about '80's submarines with that performance really ). 

 

[1MajorKoenig]

48 minutes ago, El2aZeR said:

CV play is already its own isolated minigame with its own rules and mechanics so that's completely out of the window.

No they use all the standard mechanics such as damage calculation, Pen, movement, etc. 
 

49 minutes ago, El2aZeR said:

Collaboration between CVs and the team is already practically nonexistent, removing spotting would make CVs more balanced, sacrificing what little teamplay there is left is worth it.

Not everybody here is a grumpy cat 

 

49 minutes ago, El2aZeR said:

would only be confusing for people who are braindead and for those everything is confusing, thus can be neglected.

Although it is a bit of a funny statement we both know that messing with this will things only worse.

 

Eg.:

 

CV player: “attack my target”

Friendly CA: “…. (Which target - what is he smoking…?”)

[Samyuel]

5 hours ago, mtm78 said:

 

No you poor uninformed soul. 

 

Lesta stated that, after lengthy discussions with the community and internal debates. Not because they are invisible and vulnerable the moment they are spotted, this is exactly the same as destroyers were back then so that's not all the main reason. The main reason is: they don't fit the gameplay. Meaning they don't fit the existing class interactions. They don't even fit the same game 'reality' since all other classes have fixed real life relative base speed, and only submarines break this constant sometimes by a factor of 300. A submerged WWII submarine does 9kts, not close to triple that speed and had no magic torpedo's with iff built in ( we're talking about '80's submarines with that performance really ). 

 

They stated there would be no submarine in what 2014 or something ?
The game evolved, the technology too probably which allowed them to come back on what they said to offer new thing to play in the game.
Game (and especially online games) evolve. You might like it or not but its like that. And it will keep evolving.

And please don't talk about reality for this game its an arcade game and speed is the least important thing and I am sure anybody who play low tier US BBs or the split branche would gladly throw away this "reality" for more speed.

 

[El2aZeR]

5 hours ago, 1MajorKoenig said:

No they use all the standard mechanics such as damage calculation, Pen, movement, etc. 

 

While the damage calculation is indeed the same as all other ordinance, the way it is applied is different entirely. By this "logic" RTS was the same as every other class as well when it clearly was not the case given that their ordinance mechanics were the same as surface ship ordinance as well.

Movement is completely different. No other class can move over terrain, not stop, needs to use boost to speed up or slow down, etc. To even insinuate that movement is the same as all other classes is laughable at best.

 

This is a fallacy. But if you really want to cling to it, do tell, how does playing CVs help in developing for example BB skills? Does aiming skill transfer over? Positioning? Ammo choice?

 

5 hours ago, 1MajorKoenig said:

Not everybody here is a grumpy cat

 

There is nothing grumpy about the most optimal way to play CVs. If you attempt to teamplay beyond dealing damage and spot you are deliberately shafting yourself and your team. You can attempt to play that off as "grumpiness" and humiliate yourself even further, or you can face reality.

My fellow CV main stratmania said it best. Reworked CVs are nothing but RTS strike loadouts on steroids. There is practically no difference between them beyond the basic mechanics and spotting capability being traded off for more damage.

This is ironically why most of, if not all of the most successful rework CV players happen to be former successful RTS CV players as well.

 

Now given their overwhelming ability to deal damage and spot, one of these aspects needs to go. You want CVs to teamplay? Then I suppose you're fine with sacrificing damage. You do not get both on account of CVs being as overpowered as they currently are.

 

5 hours ago, 1MajorKoenig said:

CV player: “attack my target”

Friendly CA: “…. (Which target - what is he smoking…?”)

 

Such an interaction cannot happen if the CV player is not an idiot, aka knows that surface ships cannot see what they do.

And if they are an idiot, they should not be taken into consideration to begin with.

 

35 minutes ago, Samyuel said:

The game evolved, the technology too probably which allowed them to come back on what they said to offer new thing to play in the game.

 

Quite literally the official statement on subs is that they do not fit in the game, but WG is afraid WoWs will run out of content.

Quote

GamesBeat: How long have you been thinking about submarines, as opposed to executing on the concept, getting it in the game?

 

Alexandr Sasha Nikolaev: We’ve been discussing submarines since the beginning. The first conclusion was that we didn’t think that it was necessary. They didn’t fit the gameplay meta. But eventually we realized that we’d otherwise run out of content, run out of historical ships. At the moment, we already have all the major nations represented, with most of the iconic, legendary ships.

Source: https://venturebeat.com/2018/09/18/why-wargaming-is-disrupting-world-of-warships-with-submarines-and-revamped-aircraft-carriers/

[Aethervoxx]

8 hours ago, 1MajorKoenig said:

CV

Why, Major Koenig, do you even argue over/defend/talk about anything Rework CV related? Reworked CVs are a total disaster.

All these alterations  to the CVs themselves & all the alterations to the other ship classes due to these reworked CVs points to nothing but reworked CVs being an utter disaster.

I want the RTS CVS back - all of them (including all the still missing odd tier CVs).

[1MajorKoenig]

3 hours ago, El2aZeR said:

Movement is completely different.

No it is the same just elevated. 
 

3 hours ago, El2aZeR said:

By this "logic" RTS was the same as every other class as well when it clearly was not the case given that their ordinance mechanics were the same as surface ship ordinance as well.

RTS used also some core mechanics such as spotting yes but it was still notably detached (“mini game”) by the controls and view alone 

 

3 hours ago, El2aZeR said:

Reworked CVs are nothing but RTS strike loadouts on steroids.

Doesn’t prevent yourself from

cooperating with your time in any way. Spotting for the team, attacking a key target for the team, focus the Team on a DD

 

3 hours ago, El2aZeR said:

Such an interaction cannot happen if the CV player is not an idiot, aka knows that surface ships cannot see what they do.

No, claiming such interaction should not happen is the problem. 
 

The only option btw is if you would take away team spotting for all classes. Possible but pointless.
 

The starting point btw. was why WG should not listen to a lot of these CV suggestions out of the community. This suggestion and your insistence on it clearly show why