Discussion thread for "some interesting info around the world"

[22cm]

On 02.03.2018 at 9:44 AM, 22cm said:

Sub Octavian posted this on the russian forums: Link

 

 
"CV rework

Carriers are really a bad spot in terms of game balance. We are working on a full restart of this class, and we intend to solve the following problems:

* excessive influence on the fight,
* a huge skill gap and complexity of training,
* a huge gap in air defense and protection from AB (all or nothing),
* the possibility of total roflstomp (?)(especially at high tiers).

 

We want the aircraft carriers to play more interestingly and cheerfully, so that they fit more organically into the game, so that their popularity grows, not harming the balance and not causing a negative reaction from the players.

 

^ I can only repeat the WG official statement (not mine).

 

Arty in WoT is a small child compared to carriers in WoWs.

 

[Darth_Glorious]

Spoiler

Kronstadt gun is super trollish, can miss 8/9 vs a BB at 10 km.

 

[lankylad11_lankylad]

23 hours ago, El2aZeR said:

 

Narrowing down this gap means a CV will be able to strike you no matter how much AA you stack. This will be further exacerbated by the fact that CVs will lose their only inherent ability (aka spotting), so the one thing CVs have left is damage dealing, thus it needs ludicrous buffs. Also largely in line with comments WG has made on it.

So that translates into a substantial buff to plane survivability (or nerf to all AA capabilities with very few exceptions) and alpha strike.

A CV should be able to strike unaccompanied BBs and most DDs.  Its called counter play.  BBs have no counter at the moment.  I've said already that commander skills play too much of a role in the total AA a ship has whereas instead the main factor should be the values that WG gives for AA on the upgraded hull.  In terms of the skill gap that's simply about fighter management which requires far too much micro management even above what a CV required already with strafes being the main problem

 

 

[Culiacan_Mexico]

2 hours ago, lankylad11_lankylad said:

A CV should be able to strike unaccompanied BBs and most DDs.  Its called counter play.  BBs have no counter at the moment.  I've said already that ...

 

Please explain the game play you seek where DDs should be accompanied?

[Boris_MNE]

WG balance= utterly broken or useless.

Lets see what we will get with CVs.

---

[Sander93]

2 hours ago, lankylad11_lankylad said:

A CV should be able to strike unaccompanied BBs and most DDs.  Its called counter play.  BBs have no counter at the moment. 

 

No, DDs should be the counter to BBs and most of them are. A CV should be a multirole supplement to the team that has the luxury of finishing off wounded, or damaging out-of-position enemies at any time. 

 

CV's should not be instantly nuking DDs and BBs like they do now. 

[Affeks]

3 hours ago, Darth_Glorious said:

  Reveal hidden contents

Kronstadt gun is super trollish, can miss 8/9 vs a BB at 10 km.

 

Doing side by side comparison between Moskva and Kronny places Kronshtadt in a very bad light.

Does not look enjoyable to play so far. Hoping they dont make it a super noob friendly cruiser.

Instead hoping they make it a high skillcap BB.

[44smok]

I wouldn't believe an opinion from a supertester. Those guys are known to be the potatiest potatoes out there. If a supertester can't hit anything with Kronstadt the most likely reason is that he can't hit anything anyway.

[Affeks]

29 minutes ago, 44smok said:

I wouldn't believe an opinion from a supertester. Those guys are known to be the potatiest potatoes out there. If a supertester can't hit anything with Kronstadt the most likely reason is that he can't hit anything anyway.

I have checked the stats for the gun, and while I do believe Darth_Glorious is exaggerating, the dispersion IS much worse than a cruiser while gaining very few/none of benefits BB dispersion usually entails all the while losing the pure DPM advantage cruisers have. 

 

Same dispersion as the BB with one of the worst dispersions at its tier? Not a good sign. I was hoping for a middle of the way dispersion like Graf Spee (and I even consider Graf Spee an underwhelming cruiser), but the fact they they even tested such bad dispersion gives me a bad feeling about where they want to take this ship.

To put this into perspective, most cruisers have about 45% hitrate at 10km (DD sized target), BBs have about 25% and Graf Spee has 34%. Thats a perfect middleground, but as you can see Kronny only lands at 26%. 

 

Heres hoping for a buff. 

 

[lankylad11_lankylad]

3 hours ago, Culiacan_Mexico said:

Please explain the game play you seek where DDs should be accompanied?

I never said DDs should be unaccompanied, just that they should be strikeable by the CV. 

[lankylad11_lankylad]

3 hours ago, Sander93 said:

 

No, DDs should be the counter to BBs and most of them are. A CV should be a multirole supplement to the team that has the luxury of finishing off wounded, or damaging out-of-position enemies at any time. 

 

CV's should not be instantly nuking DDs and BBs like they do now. 

They don't instantly nuke BBs because the AA levels of most of them are such that most CVs get their planes obliterated when they try.  I agree that they should be able to punish out of position enemies but if you have enough AA in A BB at the moment, you can go around without an issues.  At one point I tried to take a Bismarck in an Enterprise but I could not get any planes even into an attack without losing them all with no other ships in the vicinity.  Given the Enterprise was specifically designed as a counter for German BBs, there is no way that should have been able to happen whatever captain skills the Bis took

[Culiacan_Mexico]

6 hours ago, lankylad11_lankylad said:

I never said DDs should be unaccompanied, just that they should be strikeable by the CV. 

Why?  Again what game play do you seek?

 

Giving incentives to BBs to cluster with other ships will reinforce a certain type of game play... ok fair enough.  Game play wise, is this what you want for DDs?

[Prospect_b]

8 hours ago, lankylad11_lankylad said:

They don't instantly nuke BBs because the AA levels of most of them are such that most CVs get their planes obliterated when they try.  I agree that they should be able to punish out of position enemies but if you have enough AA in A BB at the moment, you can go around without an issues.  At one point I tried to take a Bismarck in an Enterprise but I could not get any planes even into an attack without losing them all with no other ships in the vicinity.  Given the Enterprise was specifically designed as a counter for German BBs, there is no way that should have been able to happen whatever captain skills the Bis took

Ok, I barely play cv and don't have enterprise.

 

But, I don't believe a word of it.

 

If you say specifically counters German bb, that means you're using ap bombs, so you can send your entire strike package at once cause no need for dot.

 

So You are saying then that a Bismarck shot down four (!) air groups before a single one could get through, all on its own...

 

Please send replay. Because it's impossible.

[lankylad11_lankylad]

11 hours ago, Culiacan_Mexico said:

Why?  Again what game play do you seek?

 

Giving incentives to BBs to cluster with other ships will reinforce a certain type of game play... ok fair enough.  Game play wise, is this what you want for DDs?

I thought CV's were supposed to contest caps and swing caps in their teams favour hence certain DDs having defensive fire to be able to ninja cap.   I think in general the CV vs DD matchup is reasonably ok, its CV vs BB that I have the major issue with and fighter mechanics being far too skill intensive

 

The game against the Bismarck was some time ago, but it did happen  E's planes are not that tanky and with a full AA build, manual AA and the lot any high tier BB can have monsterous AA.  With the amount of radar in the game, DDs are not the counter of BBs any more, particularly to Missouri and the higher German BBs so something else needs to be

[Culiacan_Mexico]

56 minutes ago, lankylad11_lankylad said:

I thought CV's were supposed to contest caps and swing caps in their teams favour hence certain DDs having defensive fire to be able to ninja cap.   I think in general the CV vs DD matchup is reasonably ok, its CV vs BB that I have the major issue with and fighter mechanics being far too skill intensive

I seem to have noticed that many good carrier players going for opening snipes of the opposing teams DDs early, while less skilled CV players seem to over look this aspect of the game.  Is the sniping of DDs early a desirable goal? 

[Major_Damage225]

16 minutes ago, Culiacan_Mexico said:

I seem to have noticed that many good carrier players going for opening snipes of the opposing teams DDs early, while less skilled CV players seem to over look this aspect of the game.  Is the sniping of DDs early a desirable goal? 

I'm no cv player, but taking out the enemys DD at the early phases of a match severely cripples them, since your own DD then can freely cap, torp BB's, harras CA/CL's, it's a big advantage. 

(correct me if im mistaken) 

[lankylad11_lankylad]

21 minutes ago, Culiacan_Mexico said:

I seem to have noticed that many good carrier players going for opening snipes of the opposing teams DDs early, while less skilled CV players seem to over look this aspect of the game.  Is the sniping of DDs early a desirable goal? 

possibly not, but its also a sign that AA is too high.  CV players are looking for targets and not many are isolated at the start so most ships cannot be targeted.  However, DDs going for caps are often ahead of their fleet and so not covered by other AA bubbles.  Also as the previous poster says, it can swing the game

[Culiacan_Mexico]

Just now, Major_Damage225 said:

I'm no cv player, but taking out the enemys DD at the early phases of a match severely cripples them, since your own DD then can freely cap, torp BB's, harras CA/CL's, it's a big advantage. 

(correct me if im mistaken) 

DDs counter DDs for the most part, so if the opposing DD goes down early...  I have a chance for a very good game.  

[El2aZeR]

41 minutes ago, Culiacan_Mexico said:

Is the sniping of DDs early a desirable goal? 

 

Regardless of whether or not this is desirable, how can you even prevent this from happening?

 

The "problem" with CVs in this regard is that they follow a meta that, as far as the community is concerned, is long outdated. DDs were never supposed to lone wolf it everywhere like they do now, but instead still operate relatively close (aka within ~10km or so) of nearby AA cover to not only be able to run for it if enemy planes appear on the horizon, but to guard their teammates against enemy DDs, spot torpedoes and provide smoke cover as well. Distance to the enemy usually played no role as your (IJN) torps were either long ranged enough or you were a USN DD focused more on fleet defense and utility rather than being on the offensive. This playstyle still works to a large extend and is still very effective when contesting caps but barely anyone employs it anymore. Too often do I see DDs rushing headlong into a cap even when my planes are already on them when they could've easily reached friendly AA cover had they turned as soon as my aircraft appeared on the horizon.

 

On the other hand adjusting CVs to not enforce this playstyle is pretty much impossible. Even if you force them to use DW torps and AP bombs (which will likely never happen) this doesn't prevent them from targeting DDs with the latter, the comparatively low damage dealt can still easily turn a knifefight in their team's favor.

[Sub_Human]

32 minutes ago, El2aZeR said:

 

Regardless of whether or not this is desirable, how can you even prevent this from happening?

 

The "problem" with CVs in this regard is that they follow a meta that, as far as the community is concerned, is long outdated. DDs were never supposed to lone wolf it everywhere like they do now, but instead still operate relatively close (aka within ~10km or so) of nearby AA cover to not only be able to run for it if enemy planes appear on the horizon, but to guard their teammates against enemy DDs, spot torpedoes and provide smoke cover as well. Distance to the enemy usually played no role as your (IJN) torps were either long ranged enough or you were a USN DD focused more on fleet defense and utility rather than being on the offensive. This playstyle still works to a large extend and is still very effective when contesting caps but barely anyone employs it anymore. Too often do I see DDs rushing headlong into a cap even when my planes are already on them when they could've easily reached friendly AA cover had they turned as soon as my aircraft appeared on the horizon.

 

On the other hand adjusting CVs to not enforce this playstyle is pretty much impossible. Even if you force them to use DW torps and AP bombs (which will likely never happen) this doesn't prevent them from targeting DDs with the latter, the comparatively low damage dealt can still easily turn a knifefight in their team's favor.

Part of the problem as a dd in randoms is that spawn loitering bb are drawn to green things. One of the only ways you can make them move is to take a cap. If you get chased of by planes the team keep loitering and points keep ticking away (If your enemy counterparts are allowed to cap by your cv). 

[El2aZeR]

14 minutes ago, Systergummi said:

Part of the problem as a dd in randoms is that spawn loitering bb are drawn to green things. One of the only ways you can make them move is to take a cap. If you get chased of by planes the team keep loitering and points keep ticking away (If your enemy counterparts are allowed to cap by your cv). 

 

Indeed.

The entire issue is a convoluted mess right now. BB overpopulation plays into the hands of CVs, camping plays into the hands of CVs, the lack of CVs (ironically) plays into the hands of CVs and so forth and so on. Too many problems that should've gotten nipped in the bud a long time ago were allowed to fester or even exacerbated by poor design choices on WG's part, getting us to where we are today.

[Deckeru_Maiku]

59 minutes ago, El2aZeR said:

DDs were never supposed to lone wolf it everywhere like they do now, but instead still operate relatively close (aka within ~10km or so) of nearby AA cover to not only be able to run for it if enemy planes appear on the horizon, but to guard their teammates against enemy DDs, spot torpedoes and provide smoke cover as well. Distance to the enemy usually played no role as your (IJN) torps were either long ranged enough or you were a USN DD focused more on fleet defense and utility rather than being on the offensive. This playstyle still works to a large extend and is still very effective when contesting caps but barely anyone employs it anymore.

 

I'm playing a lot.... and I'm playing a lot DDs... and I never (!!!) had the chance to stay within 10km of an AA bubble if I wanted my team to win the game.

BBs stay so far behind usually that any cruiser getting close to a cap will be focussed by the enemy team. To win this "focus battle" the DD has to go forward to spot, as the CV usually is busy sending his planes along the map edge to snipe the enemy CV...

So no, in random battles I do not think this playstyle would be possible or achievable.

[Sub_Human]

4 minutes ago, El2aZeR said:

 

Indeed.

The entire issue is a convoluted mess right now. BB overpopulation plays into the hands of CVs, camping plays into the hands of CVs, the lack of CVs (ironically) plays into the hands of CVs and so forth and so on. Too many problems that should've gotten nipped in the bud a long time ago were allowed to fester or even exacerbated by poor design choices on WG's part, getting us to where we are today.

All true. And a fine mess it is. Still its a fun game.

[El2aZeR]

Just now, Deckeru_Maiku said:

So no, in random battles I do not think this playstyle would be possible or achievable.

 

This ofc implies that your team is playing the objective rather than camping all the way in spawn.

Or alternatively that there is ample island cover for your cruisers to hide behind close to the objective. In Sea of Fortune for example a single well positioned high tier cruiser can shut down two caps easily on their own. Such maps remain a rarity however, in fact Sea of Fortune is the only one that comes to my mind right now.

[Culiacan_Mexico]

1 hour ago, El2aZeR said:

 

Regardless of whether or not this is desirable, how can you even prevent this from happening?

Just to note:  I am not advocated there should be any changes in this regard, but the easiest way would be to give CV deep water torpedoes only.  While regular HE bombs can damage a full health DD  at game start, it is less likely to totally destroy it.  Of course CV with deep water torpedoes only opens up all kinds of other problems.

 

Regarding AA: I think the current system needs a complete rework.