Jump to content


  • Content Сount

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

  • Clan


Community Reputation

25 Neutral

About Chann_Winson

  • Rank
    Petty Officer
  • Insignia

Recent Profile Visitors

609 profile views
  1. Chann_Winson

    Santa Crates

    Quote: Joshua (WOPR) - WarGames 1983
  2. Chann_Winson

    WG`s fix for uptiering .....?

    I was really looking forward to this improvement but should have known that it sounded way to good to be true. While the cap on up-tier games seems to work, it seems almost all other games I have in T7 are now against T9. Probably due to the higher numbers of players in higher tiers... Can't say much about the other Tiers as i am currently grinding T7 BB and DD and hence probably don't have the 20 games in Tier 5, 6 and 8 yet but I would guess that all lower tiers are seeing this kind of behaviour. So it would seem that while WG might have fixed the T8 issue they now just made the life of other players in Tier 5-7 worse.... Maybe it will get better over time or if WG will balance the percentage Cap of the Tiers but right now it is just yet another disappointment. GG WG
  3. Chann_Winson

    It's hard to take CV feedback to the devs when...

    Kind gave WG the same feedback here: https://forum.worldofwarships.com/topic/189787-its-hard-to-take-cv-feedback-to-the-devs-when/?do=findComment&comment=4453997 Since WG didn't really respond to that apart from Sub_Octavian's post on reddit below and have confirmed that CV's will be in the next T10 ranked season I have to assume that they are mostly happy with their work or too proud to admit they screwed up and only succeeded in delivering have their objectives.
  4. Chann_Winson

    Super Unicum Seeking Advice on CV Counterplay

    My guess would be you didn't sacrifice enough puppies and kittens to RNGsus...
  5. Chann_Winson

    It's hard to take CV feedback to the devs when...

    I think you are getting a lot of feedback of the "subjective feelings" of the playerbase here. Lets take the example of the subjective feedback "DD get destroyed early in game either by CV directly or while spotted from CV". No i can go ahead and provide screenshots of the scoreboard and record the time of the battle when all the DD on my team or the OpFor have been destroyed. But that would still only show an average of the few games I play. Now you guys have the data to look at that and compare the life expectancy for DD's now to before the launch of the rework. Your data should also show how much damage on average the DD's take from planes or from ships while spotted by a CV. Again something that your data should or could show and we just don't have access too. Yes I understand that you can't reply to all posts here. I worked in IT Support, Testing and Service Mgmt for over 20 years, so I do understand your side too. But it would be nice to get some sort of general feedback on WG's /Dev's perspective of where the state of the CV rework is. Something like a follow-up on what Sub_Octavian did in the EU Stream before the launch of the CV Rework. A review on how the rework solved Problems in RTS and accomplished the Goals identified and set by WG and also cover some of the feedback from the community. Preferably on a live stream since it is always nicer to see the face behind the name on the forums here. Also If WG could provide some general statistics /analysis on subjectively perceived issues like the DD example above, would really be helpful. Since we now seem to have at least one CV in 9 out of 10 battles while back in RTS it was rather the other way around, our perception might also be wrong... I believe providing that kind of information on a general / high level backed with data even if it is just an acknowledgment and no announcement planed fixes would really help to defuse the current rather heated climate on the forums and in game. Thank you for your consideration and have a nice day. Cheers Chann
  6. The interaction is between Planes and AA gun mounts. And those get destroyed a lot especially if you feel the HE-love from Conqueror for example. This is just a screenshot of my last match and I didn't get hit by a lot of HE. JB has Dual.Porpuse secondaries so i basically lost 11 of my 29 AA mounts. When the CV attacked me at the end of the Match he had a full squadron with full HP. Since CV's don't permanently lose their planes they will have an advantage towards the end of the match against ships that will also have lost a lot of HP that can't be repaired by that point. Don't get me wrong I don't want to see CV's get totally deplaned anymore like it was possible back in RTS! But if a cruiser makes a mistake by showing broadside in front of a BB he will get punished with citadel hits. Even if he has repair party he will not be able to repair all the damage and will have to play very careful for the rest of the game or head back to port early. That is something that all surface ships have in common. CV's don't. If they lose an entire squadron they will just have to switch to another one and wait. Even if they do lose all their planes they will just have to wait. But when the planes are back they will be just as strong as in the beginning of the match. That doesn't promote learning from mistakes as much as it does for Cruisers in this example. To balance this you could make AA guns more resilient or Imho the the better solution would be to reduce the HP of the plains in correlation to how may planes they lost. Of course there should be a hard cap of some kind (maybe at 80%-50%) and some damage might even get restored again to not make them totally irrelevant to the point where it is similar to being deplaned again. This could also promote more strategic use of your squadrons or teamwork. First use Rockets / HE to destroy AA mounts before you switch to torpedo bombers. Just an Idea, but I hope you understand the issue that i assume the OP wanted to point at.
  7. Chann_Winson

    It's hard to take CV feedback to the devs when...

    After seeing the CV Rework Preview with Sub_Octavian and MrConway I was really optimistic about the rework because it covered pretty much the Issues I had with the RTS CV's Here a write-up of that stream: Now after Closed, Open, PTS and 3 month of CV Rework on the Live_Servers lets revisit these problems and goals and how the rework dressed them: I believe that it is save to say that the first two Problems of High difficulty and Low popularity have been successfully addressed. In the case of difficulty it might have gone too far and made CV play too easy and for me personally got boring very fast. But that for sure is a matter of opinion and preferences. While the the damage output over time has been reduced significantly in general I feel that CV's still have a too High impact compared to the other classes. This mainly because recon ability provided by the higher speed of the planes and the Fighter Planes being able to spot ships too. So the CV is still able to of area denial by putting his fighters over a cap and spot DD's and CL/CH. This especially in Games where there are two CV's per side. Last but not least the AA System / AA builds /skills worthless. While the AA in general has been improve and i get higher numbers of shoot down planes in most of my 180+ ships, this has somewhat been countered by the endless respawn of planes making me feel like Don Quixote fighting windmills or like cutting off a head of a Hydra (if you like this analogy better). Yes the CV player might have to wait for his squadron to re-spawn but even with a full AA Des Moines build it will not hurt the CV player for very long while the Des Moins won't be able to fully restore its health. Further AA batteries can still get destroyed permanently which gives the CV. So IMHO only half of the issues of the Carriers in RTS have been addressed. So what about the Goals? Again I believe that it is safe to say that the rework, made CV's more accessible to new players and reduced the complexity curve a lot. I held off from playing CV's in PTS as I have always considered it a personal end game objective after getting all other classes to Tier X. It did make it a lot easier to get very good results after just a few battles. So yeah mission accomplished in that regard. Seeing that we now have at least one CV in almost every battle It did succeed to open up the CV class to a broader player-base by making it more accessible and enjoyable, but that mostly at the cost of enjoyment for DD and CL/CH players. This mostly because the Interaction between planes and surface ships (lets call them just targets) didn't change much at all. The Priority sector system not really anymore useful or exiting as AA on/off or activating defensive AA. It's just pushing a button and praying to RNGsus... Sorry WG this is boring as hell. In RTS even BB's at least had a chance to see incoming torpedo bombers in time to at least try to avoid them and better Captains than me even succeeding. Yes the damage is lower but it still feels like a very one-sided no skill interaction. Looking only at Damage CV's have made a step into the right direction towards balance. But aren't there yet. Form the Impact on the outcome of the game? Not really. Spotting / Recon still has a hugh impact. The abbility to scout / attack a ship all across the map in almost no time to reset a cap is also having a hugh impact. Maybe the difference between a good and a bad CV player now shifted more towards how well he supports his team or is focused on his personal highscore .... Well WG just looking at how many play CV now you make CV's great again. Now how about you make AA fun again? To me personally this is the number one reason I dislike CV's so much. I really don't get a sense that there is anything i can do to fight planes. Ichase covered exactly that in one of his video's and i think he has some valid points there: https://youtu.be/WMW-hwBG8YQ Like with every Software Implementation new Issues that appear: - Still too much scouting ability of CV’s due to planes high speed and the ability of fighter planes to spot ships. Possible Solution: Don't let Fighters detect ships. Or even better only show ships detected by all CV planes only on the minimap - Too easy to target and ships in smoke due to the elevated angle of view making smoke almost useless. Possible Solution: Remove smoke boarder line to not make it too easy to hit the target in the center. Make make the smoke cloud move or wobble. Btw this will also make it less easy for surface ships to just aim at the center of the smoke and blind fire, (especially with scout planes). - Too high damage to DD with Rockets. Possible Solution: Make spread wider or change sigma (even if just for DD's ). Reduce damage of rockets in exchange for slightly higher fire change? - Hardly any CV vs CV interaction until endgame due to highly effective AA / Fighers. Possible Solution: Reduce AA, put fighters on longer cool down and give players the control over it. - With CV’s now present in almost every game AA Captain Skills (3&4 Points) and modules are required on almost every ship reducing the option to take other required skills on some ships (IFHE for example) Since all skills and module are only multipliers to the base AA value of the ship they become very useless too ships like Musashi or Kronshtadt just to name the ones that got removed from the arsenal for exactly that reason (I assume) Possible Solution: Make AA skills less extensible and individually address ships that have very poor AA. There would be more to list here but I already put too much time into this for it to get ignored overlooked again, like i experienced with previous feedback in PTS and closed Beta. WoWs is a great game with a lot of potential but right now I really can't say that i enjoy the gameplay very much. Already took a 3 month break right before 0.8.0 (Because the game simply wasn't ready for live servers IMHO)and will most likely take another break very soon. I play games to relax and in the current state WoWs just doesn't provide that for me. Good luck
  8. Chann_Winson

    Such lovely matchmaking WG.

    Ok you just disqualified yourself with that that answer.
  9. Chann_Winson

    Such lovely matchmaking WG.

    You use mostly WR as comparison. In a random distribution WR will only normalize over a lot larger sample size then battles in a single ship. Imho the result clearly reflects the imbalance.
  10. Chann_Winson

    Such lovely matchmaking WG.

    If you don't play in Divisions a lot you will average out at around 50%. Looking at the overall Population 800 battles isn't that much... I have 6200 battles in random and a WR of 52%. I would consider myself an average player. I also started with a lot lower WR rate. My Advise, don't take the stats too seriously. Also the play style in coop and Random is very different. The results of an random distribution should eventually level out unless you division up with other above average players. The WR Distribution overall is basically a bell-curve
  11. Chann_Winson

    Such lovely matchmaking WG.

    No it wouldn't. Right now MM is searching for 24 players to put into the same match. The balancing i would suggest would happen after these 24 players have been selected. Here an example: In this example there where no Divisions and by exchanging just two players between the two sides / teams the overall balance would be much better. Both sides would have 4 average to good players. That doesn't impact queue waiting time at all. It still won't be perfect but over all the quality of the balancing would improve. Doesn't that make sense?
  12. Chann_Winson

    Such lovely matchmaking WG.

    Yes, it can happen that your team just melts away one by one but calling it the main reason for steamrolls is just making it way to easy. How a team plays together and focus their fire does have a hug effect. There is also a strong correlation between ships getting broadside citadel hits and player experience. MM will never be able to compensate for mistakes people make in battle but by providing two well (skill) balanced teams at least both sides start with the same opportunities. The randomness we have now doesn't do that. About a year ago I took screenshots of the game result screen and Matchmaking Monitor after each game over several days. I gathered information of over 200 battles and must by looking at Avg DMG and Kill Ratio the prediction of the from MM Monitor Team stats matched the outcome in game in over 72%.Yes there were matches where the other team should never have won but still did and vice versa. Balancing Teams in MM based on skill will not prevent steamrolls. But it would at least ensure that both sides start with near equal opportunities. Something you really can't say about the current Matchmaking. There will still be times where you will loose several battles in a row and also have winning streaks. But in both cases the end result would be much closer. Complete steamrolls will still happen but they most likely will be the exception and not the rule as it seems to be right now.
  13. Chann_Winson

    Such lovely matchmaking WG.

    I agree and I suggested just that in a PM to a WG Employee. This is part of the answer I got: After that my expectations for WG to really improve MM have been reduced to NULL ...
  14. Chann_Winson

    Such lovely matchmaking WG.

    Well it is more likely to be unbalanced than not. Just reduce it to the 3 Options: 1. Unbalanced in vavour of green team 2. Balanced for both green and red team 3. Unbalanced in vavour of red team Yes it is very simplified but still it becomes obvious that just leaving everything to chance will result in at least 66% chance of a one sided game. We you further take into account that there are not just 24 solo players but also pre grouped divisions the chance for a onesided match will only go up. Yes balancing player skills between the two teams is difficult but I dare to say that anything that WG does can only make things better.
  15. Chann_Winson

    Such lovely matchmaking WG.

    Been there too, WG just doesn't care. If you are having a streak of these kind of matches WG assumes it is just because you are having a bad day and are not on top of your game... That is why your entire team of 12 is loosing. Not the fact that MM doesn't care about balancing players based on skill between the two sides.