Discussion thread for "some interesting info around the world"

[Toivia]

Just saying @MrConway, I'm entirely fine with CVs being removed entirely from the game (well okey, they can stay in operations, maybe even coop).

[TVLX]

6 hours ago, MrConway said:

 

That is hard to say, it will take a while for everyone to get used to playing and playing against the new CVs, so I expect us to be making smaller tweaks for a while. 

 

@MrConway Can we get that clarified a bit more - if after the release of 0.8 to the main server, it quickly becomes clear that there are major balance issues (potentially whole classes remaining docked) are there plans to react to it quickly with weekly or micro-patches (even if that's just temporary over buffing/de-buffing to abate the issues) or are we going to be left waiting 4-5 weeks for the next patch as per the typical patch cycle? 

 

Obviously we are in for a yo-yo effect of the balance swinging each way for multiples of patches hopefully becoming more balanced with each pass....

 

But there is a real chance that it could be absolutely game breaking for certain ship classes at certain tiers. Don't get me wrong, I like the CV concept, i'm not trying to $hit all over it but I (and i'm sure plently others) don't get a warm and fuzzy feeling that WG is really taking how badly this could go seriously. It feels like the approach is roll it out and deal with minor tweaking issues but the reality is that it could make certain ships/classes unplayable at first due to AA balance but also severe over population of CV's. If the AA of the surface fleet isn't good enough as has been the feedback, its going to make the CV population issue even worse as a significant portion of players wont put up with being farmed every match with no way to fight back.

 

It really should be WG's priority with this particular update to be rolling out balance patches like they are going out of date.

[kodos]

I never liked the RTS style gameplay from CV and if I remember correctly, Warplanes was used as an argument why CV gameplay need to be different in Warships

So I am glad that finally something changed

I also agree that testing on PTS does not give any data on overall performance and games on live environment are needed to see what really is possible or not.

 

But my problem with the CV rework is a different one, which would say is coming down to the problem that it seems that the reworked gameplay is made to fit consoles instead of PC

 

The annoying AA sector screen instead of just clicking on the compass (and than there is the question why we cannot have this for secondaries too), the question why there are not 4 fields to chose from (so what happens if planes attack straight from the front or back, specially with ships who have their main AA their, would be a thing to improve those sectors).

[Darth_Glorious]

Short + mid range AA module HP buffed from 200 to 400.

Long range DP AA module HP stays as 800.

They are still vulnerable to rockets...

[MrConway]

2 hours ago, TVLX said:

@MrConway Can we get that clarified a bit more - if after the release of 0.8 to the main server, it quickly becomes clear that there are major balance issues (potentially whole classes remaining docked) are there plans to react to it quickly with weekly or micro-patches (even if that's just temporary over buffing/de-buffing to abate the issues) or are we going to be left waiting 4-5 weeks for the next patch as per the typical patch cycle? 

 

Obviously we are in for a yo-yo effect of the balance swinging each way for multiples of patches hopefully becoming more balanced with each pass....

 

But there is a real chance that it could be absolutely game breaking for certain ship classes at certain tiers. Don't get me wrong, I like the CV concept, i'm not trying to $hit all over it but I (and i'm sure plently others) don't get a warm and fuzzy feeling that WG is really taking how badly this could go seriously. It feels like the approach is roll it out and deal with minor tweaking issues but the reality is that it could make certain ships/classes unplayable at first due to AA balance but also severe over population of CV's. If the AA of the surface fleet isn't good enough as has been the feedback, its going to make the CV population issue even worse as a significant portion of players wont put up with being farmed every match with no way to fight back.

 

It really should be WG's priority with this particular update to be rolling out balance patches like they are going out of date.

 

 

Please do swing by our stream next Thursday, we've invited some guests from St Petersburg around for an in-depth CV discussion and can hopefully shed some more light on it there.

[philjd]

23 hours ago, MrConway said:

 

Of course, but being aware of feedback ≠ agreeing with feedback. 

 

My only question on the rework not already covered is - what is the logic behind the AA sectors? "to give the player something to do AA related"?

 

For centre line ships I could understand it, but for larger ships it seems a bit ludicrous.

[Darth_Glorious]

Thank to buffed accuracy (BB from 60% to 75%, CA from 75% to 90%, DD from 85% to 100%, CV from 95% to 100%),  new AA is better until when rocket planes come and blow them up...

[Darth_Glorious]

Jap 25 mm gun range changed to short range AA, range reduced from 3.5 to 1.9 km . RIp Yamato.

Meanwhile, Soviet 25 mm has 2.3 km range

[Darth_Glorious]

US AA 20 mm range nerfed from 2.1 km to 1.5 km 

[Darth_Glorious]

Long and mid range AA now have DPS too (~200 HP per sec), the flak burst deals 2-3 k DPS in its bubble volume.

[fumtu]

27 minutes ago, Darth_Glorious said:

Jap 25 mm gun range changed to short range AA, range reduced from 3.5 to 1.9 km . RIp Yamato.

 

Majority of IJN DDs only have 25mm guns as AA. So now there is no need to even bother to try to prevent plane attack.

[Verblonde]

4 minutes ago, Darth_Glorious said:

Long and mid range AA now have DPS too (~200 HP per sec), the flak burst deals 2-3 k DPS in its bubble volume.

Presumably, the long-range stuff can still be dodged entirely though?

[Darth_Glorious]

Just now, Verblonde said:

Presumably, the long-range stuff can still be dodged entirely though?

It has DPS now so your plane will die if you stay too long in AA range.

[Verblonde]

Just now, Darth_Glorious said:

It has DPS now so your plane will die if you stay too long in AA range.

Ah - that's *as well* as the damage you take if you get hit by a burst?

[El2aZeR]

T4 TBs are the only T4 plane type that can spawn fighters.

Drop distance is about the length of a DD with TA (aka don't bother dodging in a BB lol). Squad attacks one at a time (total of 3 planes), alpha strike is 5400 for Hosho and 5567 for Langley.

 

T4 CVs are still extremely boring to play tho due to slow plane speeds. I'd say cut their alpha strike but increase their speed for a more enjoyable experience.

[Darth_Glorious]

Aside 8 fighters from consummable, i lost only 2 rocket planes and 11 torpedo planes vs new AA 

[Verblonde]

So, AA still probably far too weak, or is that down to you being good, @Darth_Glorious?

[El2aZeR]

Rocket speed seems to have been reduced.

Not that that particularly matters, really. Just lead a bit more.

 

Ranger and Lexington are still monstrously effective.

 

EDIT:

Managed an 8 min Confederate with Midway.

DFAA now creates flak bursts with a red glow as an indicator that it has been activated. When that happens, just abandon squad and come back with a fresh one.

Fighters can be cheesed again.

[Darth_Glorious]

58 minutes ago, Verblonde said:

So, AA still probably far too weak, or is that down to you being good, @Darth_Glorious?

My rocket planes still outrun flak, I attacked a human controlled Montana and lost like 5 planes  :

  

[Darth_Glorious]

Light casualties vs supposed strong AA ships (23 Midway attack planes + 9 fighters). I lost 12 attack planes to enemy fighters so only 11 attack planes downed by new AA 

[El2aZeR]

Mino is the most worthless AA ship now due to a lack of DFAA. Can't even protect itself.

Smoke firing is no longer a viable playstyle for fast firing ships. The mount of tracers you spew out betray your position pretty easily and will get you killed vs reworked CVs. RIP Akizuki/Kitakaze/Haru.

Multiple DFAA ships stacking together seem to be a "viable" way to defend yourself from reworked CVs. So yeah, DMs etc. gotta hug together too now if they don't wanna take damage from air strikes.

CVs got a pretty substantial AA buff it seems. Inevitable snipe fest at the end of a match seems to result in more casualties to AA than before.

 

31 games played in Midway, still 100% WR.

[Panocek]

17 minutes ago, El2aZeR said:

Mino is the most worthless AA ship now due to a lack of DFAA. Can't even protect itself.

Smoke firing is no longer a viable playstyle for fast firing ships. The mount of tracers you spew out betray your position pretty easily and will get you killed vs reworked CVs. RIP Akizuki/Kitakaze/Haru.

Multiple DFAA ships stacking together seem to be a "viable" way to defend yourself from reworked CVs. So yeah, DMs etc. gotta hug together too now if they don't wanna take damage from air strikes.

CVs got a pretty substantial AA buff it seems. Inevitable snipe fest at the end of a match seems to result in more casualties to AA than before.

 

31 games played in Midway, still 100% WR.

So, to make AA worthwhile you simply need more dakka? But then, only difference between current AA and rework AA is plane hp being hp instead dice roll.

 

No AA range buffs is still a thing I presume?

[El2aZeR]

5 minutes ago, Panocek said:

But then, only difference between current AA and rework AA is plane hp being hp instead dice roll.

 

And, well, AA ships aren't exactly safe on their own anymore.

Overall it's still a huge nerf to surface ships especially considering the hilarious increase in damage potential for CVs.

 

6 minutes ago, Panocek said:

No AA range buffs is still a thing I presume?

 

Yup.

[Deckeru_Maiku]

On 1/10/2019 at 4:55 PM, MrConway said:

The CV rework is certainly still in need of further tweaking and balancing, but there is simply a limit to how much you can do in a test environment. At some point you have to take it to a live audience and we feel that time has come for the CV rework.

 

So, @MrConway, what happens when everyone and their uncle will jump to one of the following alternatives to being used as a guinea pig:

 

• go full CoOp to see how the WG CV bots will work with the the new CV mechanics
• or go full LowTier (T3/4) to avoid meeting too many OP CVs
• or just stop playing for a couple of months until the chaos has been sorted out

And why should anybody really expect WG to react on customer responses about "this sh*t is never gonna working, because..." when all input coming from the experienced CV players - which I ain't - has been nearly 100% ignored, and instead this... monstrosity... of a concept will be implemented? I do not expect ANY feedback given by players to be taken serious enough to change what the all-knowing people at WG dreamed up after one of those "Way too much Vodka" office parties..

 

As I wrote, I'm not a good CV player... but when 0.8.0 hits, I'll try to abuse the sh*t out of the T4 CVs I've got... clubbing as many seals as possible as hard as possible...

[N00Boo7]

If bad play in a DD and a cruiser is heavily punished by instant delete, if bad play in BB can cripple u also in some cases delete, how bad play in new CVs will be punished? With sending your ship at edge of the map and unlimited waves of 3 types of fast  attack plains? Current CVs at least have limited number of plains..