Revert CV's rework : poll

[Ozunix]

Hello everyone, 

 

First things first, I'm not a fluent English speaker so, please be gentle with grammar stuff and wrong vocabulary. If there is a wonderful guy (or girl) who want to right this post, thanks a lot to send me a message.

Ok, let's start to the point.

 

I) Why a poll on a revert that may never happen ?

 

In only one word, hope. 

WG has reworked CVs for more than two years now and we still talk a lot about them, in both FFA and competitive environment, CVs is for sure a hot topic. I wont detail here why the reworked CVs are toxic or not for the game, because their is plenty of topics, in many languages that talk about it. I consider that everyone now have a clear and close mind about CVs.

 

I know that some of you will see my clan tag and check my stats, yes I used to play and abuse of RTS CVs. But even before 0.8.0, I never said CVs were balanced, they have never been balanced since early days of the game. Asking for a direct and brutal revert, even if it's a possibility in the poll, is not what I have in mind, I want to propose a "new old" gameplay of CVs that could be at least, interesting to talk about.

 

If I think that a revert may be a useless dream, it's because CV's rework had required a lot a work, from design and drawing department, to balance and supertesting. This is, whatever is the result, a amazing amount of investment and the first time I saw the rework gameplay, I was so exited, it looked so cool to see your plane strike and get off.

But Warships Legends is now on playsation and Xbox, and CVs with the new gameplay, are well adapted to a controller, all this work, even if PC version has a revert on CVs, is not loss, it will just continue it's own path.

And that's a serious argument, a gameplay that is adapted to a consol is sometimes bad on a computer because we have more possibilities and freedom in handling, we don’t need aim assist and stuff to have a full and total control on what we are doing. That's why, a revert could be great, the current CV gameplay is not adapted to computer, that's why it feel so cool at first sigh, but quickly start boring and repetitive. 

 

II) What have to change to make it right

 

To me, the first thing that I always wanted to change about how CVs work, even in old RTS gameplay is : spotting 

CVs will never be balanced if they have both the ability to deal high damage and spot for the team. Only one solution because spotting with planes is boring, CV wont be able to spot for the team, they only spot a ship for them self and a ship that is spotted by an aircraft is only showed in minimap. This is pure logic, BB are the most tanky and heavy gun mounted, they have the possibility to deal a high amount of damage, but it cost them vision capacity and map control. A battleship is insane when and only when it has something to shoot without being in a direct threat to die. Because of gameplay diversity, you can have more tanky or more sniping types of BBs but they still have in common a high damage capacity and a low impact on caps and map awareness. 

 

For cruisers, they have the most consistent damage capacity, and the best consumables to counterplay other classes (radar, defensive fire, hydro etc.), that's why they are weak against focus fire and wrong positioning, they are relatively easy to sink. 

And for DDs, they have the best mobility and map control, the best spotting impact and a great damage capacity in rewarding placement and situations. They often have to choose between dealing dammage, keep a good map control and just survive, because they are the most easy class to kill in early game and super vulnerable to any source of damage.

Any class in the game have to trade a weakness to be strong somewhere else. CVs should not escape from this rule. If you want to deal damage with your aircraft, you cannot spot the entire enemy team. This is the essence of what is called "balance", the original word that have a left and a right side and every time that a side is stronger than the other, we simply have to choose for two options : 

Make the weak side stronger to catch up, or take back a part of the strong side.

 

In this mindset, we have to deal with the oneshot capacity of old RTS CVs. A bad aircraft carrier before 0.8.0 had almost 0% chance to sink a ship in only one strike, that's why the class didn't feel that [edited]. But don’t get it wrong, in good hands, RTS CVs used to be the most broken class in the game, without any doubt. 

How many Youtube content can you find with a DM getting 100 to 0 by Midway's AP bombs ? Plenty.

How many main DD can remember the time they faced a superunicum CV in Hakuryu who just killed you 3 minutes after the start because he know how to cross drop ?

 

If you played enough at this time, you know that it was so frustrating and stupid. If CVs are back to more RTS style, we cannot keep the class as it used to be. Old CVs were too hard to master and too strong for good players. 
And I think a key is in the rework that we have now. 

A good update for revert RTS CVs would be to limit the flying strikes squadrons to one torpedoes and one dive bomber, but they can strike multiple times with the same squadron if you still have the planes.

The empty planes would also go back to the CV in the same way as they do now, so the AA defense have more time to shut down planes even if the ship get strike. Obviously, the squadron need to be large enough in every tier to get decent chance to strike back to back a weak AA ship, but shouldn't be too huge, so the target still have time to maneuver and getting it's AA to work.

This update could solve two problems, it limit the multitask that high tier CVs used to have and nullify the possibility for good players to cross drop and one shot someone.

An other side effect of this, is getting the RTS gameplay less strike and wait, because you can strike more often with less power. That also limit the fail pressure and impact, the old CVs were too punishing when you missed a drop, because you could only do 8 to 12 drops in one game with a torps squads, missing had a huge impact in the game result and was really frustrating in the learning curve. Bad players tended to get bored of the class because it took more games to learn. Why do I have only few chances to get dammage when playing cruiser I can shoot all the game ?

 

III) The fighter squad problem

 

That always has been the worst part of RTS balance, it used to be the only class in the game where a player can just make his direct opponent just wait the end of the battle and get 0 damage or impact to the map. And it doesn't matter if you are a good or even a great CV player; if the other CV was too strong in fighter skill compared to you, you just couldn't do crap, you had almost no options to have an impact on the game.

It's often in the fighter dual that the whole game was decided to be won or lost for a team, and this, by only two players of the 24. That was wrong and toxic. 

To be honest, I don’t have a good enough solution for this, remove fighters didn't feel right with the rework, it is an important part to CV gameplay to defend your allies against other CV's strikes, that's the only way a CV player can have teamplay (besides spotting that should be removed) and interaction with the allies surface ships. It's was only with a good player with fighters that playing a BB used to be fun and enjoyable. 

It was so great to saw the torps squad coming to your poor Yamato and 30 sec later they are all destroyed by a miracle strafe 2 seconds before you get hit for 40K.

 

That's all for me, at least for today. I have no idea if this topic / poll will catch the interst of many, but I really wanted to make it since I miss the old CVs so much, not because they used to be broken but because I had so much fun and great memories in competitive and FFA. Feel free to disagree or agrue with my point of view, it's a forum after all.

[bobtherterrible]

TL:dr

I think you're over thinking this

Try playing some battles and see if you get used to it. It's not ideal but really is manageable. I very much doubt there is a solution out there that would please everyone and the spreadsheet

[Miscommunication_dept]

Many people seem to have short memories. They are unbalanced now but better than RTS.

 

 

[Hopeless_Guppy]

Your grammar seems just fine to me, however WG have this nasty little reputation for a) never giving a damn, b) never listening,so sadly  a reverse move back to the RTS system I doubt will ever be on the cards.

[ForlornSailor]

42 minutes ago, gopher31 said:

Many people seem to have short memories. They are unbalanced now but better than RTS. 

 

I disagree. Overall, CVs were much easier to deal with. One of the few problems was strafing mechanic - and that was homemade disaster from WG.

[RenamedUser_92906789]

If they made DefAA to "panic" aircraft like it used too, it would be a good start to balance them out.

[El2aZeR]

1 hour ago, gopher31 said:

Many people seem to have short memories. They are unbalanced now but better than RTS.

 

Indeed. After all it would be highly unbalanced in the eyes of someone who has found sudden success with the rework if surface ships could actually defend themselves, no?

[Hades_warrior]

Yet another Poll that wg will never care about 

[FixCVs_Nautical_Metaphor]

You people STILL keep thinking anybody at Wargaming gives any sort of damn about your feedback.

 

It has been a proven fact for more than two years that they do not.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3U-9TMZwCto

 

And all they care about re: CVs is to keep "proving" to their superiors at the top of the company and the shareholders that the rework was not a giant waste of money.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWNgIfhfdOY&amp

The only way to make the company leadership and shareholders see through that charade is to make the whole house of cards collapse, to a point where no amount of shiny new toys suffices to bring profits back up again.

 

The ongoing silent unorganised boycott is a good start

https://forum.worldofwarships.eu/topic/147638-dead-eye-will-be-changed-from-scratch/?do=findComment&comment=3813034

 

but the playerbase at large will probably fail to shed these naive beliefs in the power of feedback, and fail to organise, and keep believing in the placating myths put forth by CC shills and Community management hacks, and just return to the misery after a few minor captain skill adjustments. And thus the moment will be lost. And it would take a minor miracle to prevent that.

[Camperdown]

13 minutes ago, FixCVs_Nautical_Metaphor said:

You people STILL keep thinking anybody at Wargaming gives any sort of damn about your feedback.

 

It has been a proven fact for more than two years that they do not.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3U-9TMZwCto

 

And all they care about re: CVs is to keep "proving" to their superiors at the top of the company and the shareholders that the rework was not a giant waste of money.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWNgIfhfdOY&amp

The only way to make the company leadership and shareholders see through that sharade is to make the whole house of cards collapse, to a point where no amount of shiny new toys suffices to bring profits back up again.

 

The ongoing silent unorganised boycott is a good start

https://forum.worldofwarships.eu/topic/147638-dead-eye-will-be-changed-from-scratch/?do=findComment&comment=3813034

 

but the playerbase at large will probably fail to shed these naive beliefs in the power of feedback, and fail to organise, and keep believing in the placating myths put forth by CC shills and Community management hacks, and just return to the misery after a few minor captain skill adjustments. And thus the moment will be lost. And it would take a minor miracle to prevent that.

Why use an illegible font?

[1MajorKoenig]

6 hours ago, ForlornSailor said:

 

I disagree. Overall, CVs were much easier to deal with. One of the few problems was strafing mechanic - and that was homemade disaster from WG.

Nope that was by a community request. WG listened to feedback and disaster struck 

[FixCVs_Nautical_Metaphor]

Vor 6 Minuten, Camperdown sagte:

Why use an illegible font?

Not glad you asked but I can read it just fine, using the forum on the same wide screen I was using to play WoWs. All WoWs players have access to a similarly large monitor and if they choose to use the forum on a phone instead, that is their problem, not mine. I feel that Comic Sans' general ridiculousness and the toxicity it provokes is highly appropriate to this whole clown show. If the font should not be used, why provide a choice of fonts and different sizes in the first place?

[ForlornSailor]

20 minutes ago, FixCVs_Nautical_Metaphor said:

You people STILL keep thinking anybody at Wargaming gives any sort of damn about your feedback.

 

Nah I know they dont. I know im wasting my time, I realized it a while ago already. Not only because of CVs but because of other things aswell. Sometimes im just bored so I come back... guess its the same reason why im stuck playing this game. Sometimes.

 

4 minutes ago, 1MajorKoenig said:

Nope that was by a community request. WG listened to feedback and disaster struck  

 

They should have listened to the right people - but then again I can stop writing and just refer to what I wrote above...

[Camperdown]

24 minutes ago, FixCVs_Nautical_Metaphor said:

Not glad you asked but I can read it just fine, using the forum on the same wide screen I was using to play WoWs. All WoWs players have access to a similarly large monitor and if they choose to use the forum on a phone instead, that is their problem, not mine. I feel that Comic Sans' general ridiculousness and the toxicity it provokes is highly appropriate to this whole clown show. If the font should not be used, why provide a choice of fonts and different sizes in the first place?

I do usually read this forum on my phone, but knock yourself out mate 

[bEtHeNs]

I liked the rts concept, flet like a commander of a cv, now it is playing planes. I had kaga and enterprise, I do not use them any more. 

[guy_incognito79]

I don't remember RTS CV's so can't really vote.  I hear they required some skill back then and had some actual counterplay and even some CV on CV crime.... ie they sounded actually kinda interesting.

[Kr1gsG4ldr]

Make Hiryu great again!!!! XD

Jokes aside, yes i want RTS back too.

It was a shock when i returned to play after long time and discover this cv rework, i was very upset of it and still now a little hasn't passed because they broke definetly every single aspect of a cv.

Before was much better, always with problems, but never like now.

[ThePopesHolyFinger]

10 hours ago, Ozunix said:

pish and nonsense

You omitted the option to get rid of CVs altogether. They were broken then, they're broken now.

[300ConfirmedKills]

Revert to RTS CVs pre-AP bombs and start fixing them from there.

[lafeel]

That's a emphatic "oh *EDITED* no" from me. CV's are certainly not perfect, but we really do not need RTS CV's back.

[Yedwy]

Lets be realistic here, there will be no reverting, simple as that the way this can go is a new rework OR a proper balancing strategy and thats that...

[_DeathWing_]

[woppy101]

WG are too retarded to balance CVS plain and simple 

[MementoMori_6030]

Vor 1 Minute, woppy101 sagte:

WG are too retarded to balance CVS plain and simple 

As much as I understood their argument, they think their players are too retarded to cope with complex game mechanics. Especially their CV players. Which is not far from the truth from what I have seen.

[woppy101]

5 minutes ago, MementoMori_6030 said:

As much as I understood their argument, they think their players are too retarded to cope with complex game mechanics. Especially their CV players. Which is not far from the truth from what I have seen.

The games I have seen with CVS this morning I would agree that some players are too retarded to play CVs