Jump to content
Forum Shutdown 28/7/2023 Read more... ×
Ictogan

WG's reaction to the complaints about CVs not doing well in the new economy

140 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[TTTX]
Players
1,841 posts
7,432 battles

 

Aircraft

Costs per plane lost in battle.

  • Grumman F3F: cost increased (200 > 220)
  • Aichi B7A: cost increased (600 > 1200)
  • F2A: cost increased (200 > 320)
  • B5N2: cost increased (300 > 550)
  • Vought SBU: module tier decreased (4 > 3), cost increased (200 > 320)
  • D4Y: cost increased (600 > 1200)
  • Grumman F6F: cost increased (350 > 550)
  • J7W1-A: cost increased (600 > 1200)
  • B6N: cost increased (450 > 800)
  • XSB2D: cost increased (800 > 1700)
  • XBTK: cost increased (800 > 1700)
  • TBD: cost increased (300 > 320)
  • SBD2: cost decreased (250 > 220)
  • D1A2: cost decreased (250 > 220)
  • B4Y: cost increased (200 > 220)
  • T4M ''float'': cost increased (200 > 220)
  • N1K5-A: cost increased (450 > 800)
  • F4U-1A: cost increased (450 > 800)
  • SB2U: cost increased (350 > 550)
  • TBF: cost increased (350 > 550)
  • D3A2: cost increased (350 > 550)
  • A4N: cost increased (150 > 220)
  • AD1: cost increased (600 > 1200)
  • F4F: cost increased (200 > 220)
  • D3A1: cost increased (300 > 320)
  • F4F-4: cost decreased (250 > 220)
  • TBY-1: cost increased (350 > 550)
  • FM-2: cost decreased (250 > 220)
  • SBD3: cost increased (300 > 320)
  • A5M4: cost decreased (250 > 150)
  • T4M: cost increased (200 > 220)
  • C6N5-1b: cost increased (800 > 1700)
  • J8N1: cost increased (800 > 1700)
  • A7M2: cost increased (600 > 800)
  • A6M5: cost increased (350 > 550)
  • R2Y1: cost increased (800 > 1700)
  • J5N: cost increased (800 > 1700)
  • A5M2: cost increased (200 > 320)
  • Wakusei: cost increased (800 > 1700)
  • XSB2D: cost increased (800 > 1700)
  • F2H: cost increased (800 > 1700)
  • SB2C: cost increased (450 > 800)
  • A6M2: cost increased (300 > 320)
  • D4Y2: cost increased (450 > 800)
  • F4U: cost increased (600 > 1200)
  • SBD5: cost increased (350 > 550)

 :trollface:

  • Cool 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TTTX]
[TTTX]
Players
4,608 posts
8,139 battles

makes sense... they were way too profitable before, as evidenced by sooo many screenshots of our esteemed fellow forumites! oh wait...

:fishpalm::fishpalm::fishpalm::fishpalm::fishpalm::fishpalm::fishpalm::fishpalm:

Edited by Tyrendian89
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SPUDS]
Beta Tester
4,052 posts
8,765 battles

LOL WG why you so troll?:teethhappy:

 

Poor CVs. Their economic plight has become a joke.

 

And some of these changes aren't even 'minor', they are pretty hefty.

 AD1: cost increased (600 > 1200)

 

100% increase just randomly picked from the list.

My hope, and half expectation is that this is just the first step, in a rapid line, to make the CV bill more dynamic, and so far we have only seen the negatives. The question is, for me at least, when will we see the positives? Like say removing the income throttle on CVs? Or providing them with increased income from the things they do? Hopefully it won't be too long.

Edited by Unintentional_submarine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TTTX]
[TTTX]
Players
4,608 posts
8,139 battles

true - for all we know, this might come hand in hand with a 50% buff to all CV credit earnings or something, that wouldnt necessarily have been datamined along with this... well, we shall see...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BFT]
Beta Tester
260 posts
3,008 battles

true - for all we know, this might come hand in hand with a 50% buff to all CV credit earnings or something, that wouldnt necessarily have been datamined along with this... well, we shall see...

 

It's WG, don't count on it :sceptic:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Beta Tester
1,245 posts

So... I barely played CV since the economy changes (or actually since the AA changes to be honest).

 

Everything is fine right? Wasn't the best game, but I have premium and at least did something. And look at the spotting damage. It did not matter at all. Am I really supposed to only shoot down planes? How about giving me a decent AS loadout then?

 

Sorry for the big screenshots, but I haven't figured out a better way. And I don't  have time because I need to go to work now.

 vwGzdON.jpg

a2Tj1Cj.jpg

4nQV8tu.jpg

geYZhKm.jpg

 

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
4,367 posts
16,858 battles

Someone had a really nice binge out there. Party rushian style with Dasha dancing on the desk. Wish I was invited...

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[DUDES]
WoWs Wiki Team, Privateer
1,795 posts
19,873 battles

Seriously, this is a good one! :facepalm:

 

Even though playing against CV(s) sometimes posed a frustrating experience in an AA poor ship it is even a worse experience if CVs are completely non existent. We need to make sure they will remain in the game!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BLOBS]
Beta Tester
5,330 posts
13,776 battles

Seriously, this is a good one! :facepalm:

 

Even though playing against CV(s) sometimes posed a frustrating experience in an AA poor ship it is even a worse experience if CVs are completely non existent. We need to make sure they will remain in the game!

 

Well even if you do a semi decent saipan game your missing 100 to 200k credits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ALONE]
Modder
2,485 posts
15,343 battles

Wanted to check this on the PTS, but could not get an opponent in 7 minutes... :happy_cap:

 

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
124 posts
2,148 battles

Wargaming clearly goes full [edited] with the (recent) design choices and decisions. With the "economy rebalance", the XP and credits gains have been effectively cut in half, on every IJN CV (dunno about USN ones, I'm not playing them.. yet)

Edited by RogDodgeUK
This post has been edited by a member of the Moderation Team, due to forum rules violation.~RogDodgeUK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
742 posts
1,694 battles

would the load time issue not be rectified somewhat by buffing the Lv.3 dog-fighter perk for higher tier carriers so fully upgraded tier 8, 9 and 10s or not hugely different on the scale of capabilities and give them a 1+/- on match making?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[WG]
WG Staff, Alpha Tester
3,411 posts
4,389 battles

Gentlemen, these are data mined figures from the public test server!

 

One of the biggest points of feedback we received after the economy change was about the profitability of carriers, as such we are of course still doing some tweaking.

 

There is no need to sharpen the pitchforks just yet! :izmena:

 

 We should have some in-depth information about the economy and the effect of the recent changes coming tomorrow.

 

 

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×