Why are CVs overperforming on EU only?

[uocat]

The more the enemy teamplay as well as t10 ship portion in a game, the less a CV can do in the respect of hard dmg output. While the other important thing a CV can consistently provides to its team is Scouting. There were low dmg game I won after 0.4.1 in equal or inferior MM in which I played more as a support, esp for BBs. And the games I enjoyed most are wins over 422 hak platoons with my 232 hak. The chessing in air is fun.   All these I wrote is to point out, evaluating, claiming OP/UP and buff/nerf only according to avg. dmg is some how non sense in a team game like WoWs should be.

 

[specialkha]

 

RNG = Makes class easier not harder

Chess has no RNG and thus should be a calculable game - it just isn't practically because it has more possible outcomes than atoms in the entire universe. We can all agree that chess is hard.

Monopoly is decided 99% by randomness and that's why it makes a great family game. Everyone has a chance to win, even someone with no skill at all.

 

Randomness is important for games to not become calculable and stay interesting.

 

Enough game design lessons for you today.

 

Why is it that always people with no CV games at all or only low tier CVs (that have very very slow planes and only 2-4 squads and face no to minimal AA pressure and no AA ability) say that they require no skill? Because they are mad at CVs, because they get reliable attacks, unlike others. Reliable doesn't mean easy. No it actually means hard, because the pay-off for reliable attacks is a 3-4 minute cooldown. So if you [edited]up once it's already decreasing your effectiveness by at least 20%. If you [edited]up twice you screwed your team over.

 

It would be true if if all ships had RNG. Since nop, it is quite the opposite. Enough game design lesson for today. Kthxbye.

[uocat]

And as a player in Chinese community, I think I can have some words towards Asia server where the majority are chinese speakers. The playstyle of BBs and CAs on Asia server is quite conservative, while some early 053 hak tradition has still heavy impact there, which leads to fighter deck choice for most CV players and more "rocket or nothing" dmg stats for CVs. When avg t10 cvs meets each other, they might using whole game trying to kill each other, which is obviously low effiecient. All these then leads to a higher draw rate there esp. on standard North/Brothers.

[Ishiro32]

 

It would be true if if all ships had RNG. Since nop, it is quite the opposite. Enough game design lesson for today. Kthxbye.

 

How does fact that some ships don't have rng and others have even impact what he wrote. Really. 

Please explain this, because I am baffled by what you have written. Please go on and tell how in your head adding rng to a class (CV) would make it more skill depended. Or describe how if we would just delete RNG from other classes (BB) would make them much easier to pick up by anyone. 

[uocat]

Talking about winrate, I saw once a post saying platoon with a CV and a BB player like gbu29 surely overperform platoons without any CV. Yes and No. The thing here matters is actually communication within the platoon and with the teammates. If you ever played with us in T10 room, esp. on standard/new domin/encounter mode, you will surely see we speaks at the start of the game like "stay in grp, get aa cover for everyone". And gbu29 will speak the direction he will try to push as a top tier BB in platoon. And with random teammates, at least 7 out of 10 times it works with most members of the team. I read ppl argueing language barrier, but I have to say English is much more receivable here on EU server than on ASIA.(imagine why WG put ime support in-game?for chinese, korean, japanese etc..but for example, chinese client can only display chinese, english and Russian, others are just squares, that is the true barrier)    Edit: and you really think teamplay in a WWII game between chinese and japanese players?      Edit2: all our platoon tactic now is about gbu29's BB and pushing the line, not about getting high dmg for cv. CV's duty in our opinion is trying best to cover BB's pushing and take out dangers far from BB's reach.

[Hauptbahnhof]

 

It would be true if if all ships had RNG. Since nop, it is quite the opposite. Enough game design lesson for today. Kthxbye.

 

All ships have RNG.

 

Carriers:

- AA/Fighters shooting down none or all of the bombers before they drop is RNG.

- Which way the enemy will turn is a bit random ( since it can't be 100% predicted ).

- Fighter vs Fighter duels with equal stats and numbers is RNG who will win.

- Where the torps will hit is RNG.

- Fire and flooding modifiers from your strikes is RNG.

 

Destroyers:

- Where the torps will hit is RNG, you have no influence over it unless your closer then 3km, which you shouldn't really be.

- If your shells will trigger fire is RNG

- Where enemy shells hit you and what modules they disable when is very RNG

- If enemy secondaries hit you is very RNG

- What way ( and if ) enemies will turn away or into your torps is very random, as is if they have the sonar ability or not and can thus spot you and your torps easier.

[specialkha]

 

How does fact that some ships don't have rng and others have even impact what he wrote. Really. 

Please explain this, because I am baffled by what you have written. Please go on and tell how in your head adding rng to a class (CV) would make it more skill depended. Or describe how if we would just delete RNG from other classes (BB) would make them much easier to pick up by anyone. 

 

it is quite simple. Adding RNG to a class mean you have to use skill to compensate that RNG to be better than another user of said class. With ships with no RNG, you have no need to compensate for something.

[Shadow_Raven_1]

I'm not 100% shure, but wouldn't you agree that the perspective of view ( 2 dimentional) with CV gives you the edge. You have to take another dimention in to account when you aim your batteries with other classes, and as for torpedos it' luck and luck alone. Sice you can not calculate the chance of engine fail on enemy or the interception of your payload of other vessel on your torp path, so RNG is making things verry scares, for eg. when enemy driver is moving in evasive path 16 km away and you have 11 sec. shell flight...

[II_Nemesis_II]

 

it is quite simple. Adding RNG to a class mean you have to use skill to compensate that RNG to be better than another user of said class. With ships with no RNG, you have no need to compensate for something.

 

That's just utter bs. If you would have no RNG on battleships then even tiny miscalculation on the trajectory lead would mean that you would hit 0 of your shells in those volley. RNG makes it, that it gives you some room for error cause not all shells will land into one exact spot, but they will spread few hundred meters.

If you would master BB without RNG, then you would be god, but it would take a hell lot of practice to be able to hit reliably everytime, thus the skill ceiling would be higher. But with RNG it is quite irrelevant if you miss by 50meters or not, cause you wont hit all your shells into one spot, thus skill ceiling and floor are closer together.

[uocat]

I'm not 100% shure, but wouldn't you agree that the perspective of view ( 2 dimentional) with CV gives you the edge. You have to take another dimention in to account when you aim your batteries with other classes, and as for torpedos it' luck and luck alone. Sice you can not calculate the chance of engine fail on enemy or the interception of your payload of other vessel on your torp path, so RNG is making things verry scares, for eg. when enemy driver is moving in evasive path 16 km away and you have 11 sec. shell flight...

But when I'm shooting my batteries, there is nothing to intercept my shells/torps off, the attack connects if I aim good enough or enemy dodges bad enough. Airborn attack has one more interception phase while having one less dimension in-game.

 

[DMA27]

Because EU roxx!

[Shadow_Raven_1]

But when I'm shooting my batteries, there is nothing to intercept my shells/torps off, the attack connects if I aim good enough or enemy dodges bad enough. Airborn attack has one more interception phase while having one less dimension in-game.

 

 

True, but even with auto aim you get aprox 60-75% chance of 2/4 hit ratio on low tier BB if you are lucky/tricky enough to get there. Having in mind that BBs can be spotted from the other edge of the map 20 sec. reload can be a verry long time even if you have the perfect trajectory. And if the enemy fighters are chasing emty bombers they get rear gun fire and somewhat flack when bombers are going back to deck.

[uocat]

 

True, but even with auto aim you get aprox 60-75% chance of 2/4 hit ratio on low tier BB if you are lucky/tricky enough to get there. Having in mind that BBs can be spotted from the other edge of the map 20 sec. reload can be a verry long time even if you have the perfect trajectory. And if the enemy fighters are chasing emty bombers they get rear gun fire and somewhat flack when bombers are going back to deck.

 

Imho, never discuss balance issue based on low tier period. Things will never balance there due to "lore limit", in the current version, the low tier lord is Umikaze and Grem....The aa is quite weak if not none before T6 to give newcomers on CV error space.  You are right that for new captains, eating 2 torps from a click of auto drop is frustrating, but thats also a basic learning curve. If you cant dodge autodrop, you will never learn how to deal with manual one, right? And believe me, auto drop can almost never hit a experieced captain in low tier, esp. if he/she has experiece in CV play. Also thats why I'm negative about putting rank on T6/T7, ships in that window are not well balanced for the mode even within the shipclass, as well as captains. T8 and above is much better.(Tirpitz is an exception currently which makes Amagi useless)

[specialkha]

 

And when you aim perfectly, rng makes you miss your shots. Rng is here to smooth the skill of players, so you need more skill to compensate rng

[Vulgarny]

 

And when you aim perfectly, rng makes you miss your shots. Rng is here to smooth the skill of players, so you need more skill to compensate rng

 

Nope, RNG here is to make  the gap between no skill and skilled player smaller.

[II_Nemesis_II]

 

And when you aim perfectly, rng makes you miss your shots.

 

You shoot yourself in the foot by this statement. This means that RNG is LOWERING the skill ceiling and by the same margin it is in contrary RAISING the skill floor (ie if you would be complete donkey, you would not suck that much cause of RNG). And as Vulgarny pointed correctly, RNG is thus making the skill difference between players less noticeable.

[Takru]

[Userext]

Nope, RNG here is to make  the gap between no skill and skilled player smaller.

 

I dont think you guys realise that RNG in the game works a bit opposite way of your thought. The game isnt on hard mode for all you said to be true. The game is in a part where you use stabilized aim to hit a dot. Thats like the easiest way to do it. Everyone can point a laser that is stabilized on a system to a target. 

 

Yes RNG covers the gap between skilled and unskilled players for sake of more fun game. But more RNG in the game means it is harder to accomplish what you want to do. Tell me which one is harder. Using a sniper rifle with movement stabilizer on bipod or using a sniper rifle while walking. There is more RNG while using a sniper rifle when you are walking but that forces you to use more intelligence to actually make that shot hit. Monopoly you say is %99 random. Which is the reason it is hard to win when you try to actually use your intelligence. Because not everything is going to go in same order. This is why more luck based games are harder to win. Dont look to luck in the wrong way please. It requires more effort to win a luck based game compared to less luck based game. 

 

 

[Vulgarny]

Ok if thats true that game that is based 100% on luck would require according to you real effort to win. So you got 1 ticket and you got 180 IQ and also got world record in 25 different olympiad disciplines. While other dude in mentally disabled man with stumps instead of legs. So what effort would you put to make your chance to win better in that lottery?

[Kenliero]

 

Yes RNG covers the gap between skilled and unskilled players for sake of more fun game. But more RNG in the game means it is harder to accomplish what you want to do. Tell me which one is harder. Using a sniper rifle with movement stabilizer on bipod or using a sniper rifle while walking. There is more RNG while using a sniper rifle when you are walking but that forces you to use more intelligence to actually make that shot hit. 

 

 

That is not a very good example, since while making sniper shot hit while walking, you are physically adjusting your body to make the shot stable. That not only requires skill, but also good physique. It is NOT RNG, it is just the opposite. You take care of all the moving parts.

While in the game when you take a shot, it only needs to point right direction at the right time. You don't have to alter your physique in any way. Computer has artificial RNG, which is set. No matter what you do, that basic RNG is there. It is that set RNG that removes the skill factor, your influence in the end result, soothing levels between good aim and perfect aim. 

[Userext]

Ok if thats true that game that is based 100% on luck would require according to you real effort to win. So you got 1 ticket and you got 180 IQ and also got world record in 25 different olympiad disciplines. While other dude in mentally disabled man with stumps instead of legs. So what effort would you put to make your chance to win better in that lottery?

 

That arguement is invalid. We arent sitting on %100 luck game here. REal effort you say? A 180 IQ man would probably have enoughm oney to buy most of tickets. This is the most you cna do while mentally disabled man can get tricked by a fake lottery ticket. You see even in lottery there is effort you can make to have a higher chance of win

[Vulgarny]

 

That arguement is invalid. We arent sitting on %100 luck game here. REal effort you say? A 180 IQ man would probably have enoughm oney to buy most of tickets. This is the most you cna do while mentally disabled man can get tricked by a fake lottery ticket. You see even in lottery there is effort you can make to have a higher chance of win

 

I think you missed the part of one ticket, or you are so skilled in WoWs that you shoot at same time  10-50 salvos to increase your chance to hit

[Userext]

That is not a very good example, since while making sniper shot hit while walking, you are physically adjusting your body to make the shot stable. That not only requires skill, but also good physique. It is NOT RNG, it is just the opposite. You take care of all the moving parts.

While in the game when you take a shot, it only needs to point right direction at the right time. You don't have to alter your physique in any way. Computer has artificial RNG, which is set. No matter what you do, that basic RNG is there. It is that set RNG that removes the skill factor, your influence in the end result, soothing levels between good aim and perfect aim. 

 

That is very good example.

Body physically not being able to perform as good as others=mind not being able to controll the ship's performance in game as good as others

You take care of all the parts until you fire that shot here in a DD. If you fire torps from 10km it will have less chance of hitting comapred to firing torps from 5km. That fits perfectly to my example furhter range=less accuracy

You are the one moving your ship here. RNG isnt controlling your ship

 

I think you missed the part of one ticket, or you are so skilled in WoWs that you shoot at same time  10-50 salvos to increase your chance to hit

I didnt miss it. You limited it there and that comparison to wows is just nonsense. You cant limit the ticket amount bought. Thats the part you use your effort. You dont fire once in wows do you? Why would one be limited to buy one ticket?

[Vulgarny]

Problem is that you simply dont understand that RNG diminish the factor of skill instead of increasing it. I really cannot find an example simple enough for you to comprehend this.

[Userext]

Problem is that you simply dont understand that RNG diminish the factor of skill instead of increasing it. I really cannot find an example simple enough for you to comprehend this.

 

No the problem is that you dont use empathy and try to see it the way i see it. I used to think like you guys. But then i realised before all these technological advanced weapons there were more luck depending guns werent there? Someone gave musket as example. Back then not many people was able to use musket as a good musketeer. Yes a braindead person was able to hit something with his luck. But that wasnt common was it? There were more elite musketeers before due to the nature of luck. The more they reduced luck on guns the more people became better at them.