Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'rework'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • World of Warships - News and Information
    • News And Announcements
    • Update Notes
    • Public Test
    • Contests and Competitions
    • Events
  • General WoWs Discussion
    • General Game Discussion
    • Developer's Corner
    • Community Programs Corner
    • Support
  • Off Topic
    • Off-Topic
  • Historical Discussion
    • Discussions about Warships
    • Historical Discussions and Studies
  • Player's Section
    • Team Play
    • Player Modifications
  • International Forums
    • Foro en Español
    • Fórum Brasileiro
  • Contest Entries
  • Contest Entries
  • New Captains
  • Guías y Estrategias
  • Árboles Tecnológicos
  • Fan Art and Community Creations
  • Community Created Events and Contests

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


AIM


MSN


Website URL


ICQ


Yahoo


Jabber


Skype


Location


Interests

Found 44 results

  1. Exactly as the title says. Why are people so upset about subs? I've seen a lot of negativity about them, and I understand people don't want another CV rework fiasco, but from what I see, they seem pretty cool and easily counterable. Could I be wrong?
  2. I made a few tests on the PT server showing the new Anti-Aircraft changes coming for anti aircraft in update 0.8.7. I think the ship's GUI needs more work in identifying when the sector control is working for the AA. You will need to time when to use the sector control and the DFAA now. I hope the video informs what is coming for World of Warships The AA in WoWS feels like it use to pre-CV rework. The AA feels more useful than a noise maker. What do you guys think of the changes?
  3. Play a CV and suck in it. Sorry I'm severely out of practice after giving up on hoping the enemy Graf Zepplin, Enterprise, Saipan, or even the Kaga messes up. Sorry I can't keep up with Saipan planes, or the volume of the Kaga reserves. Sorry I couldn't get the perfect strafe on those GZ bombers while I was locked up in a fighter duel. Sorry the Enterprise has ALL OF THE PLANES. Sorry the IJN CV cross dropped you before I could react after you went straight to the cap knowing there was a CV on the enemy team. Not sorry for completely wrecking the Lexington. Sorry I cant scout the one cap, drop the enemy BB pushing you, and protect the BB on the other side of the map all at the same time. Sorry I only have so much ammo and need to recycle my planes. Sorry I can't babysit you exclusively at the expense of the team. Sorry the other flank collapsed and it's entirely my fault. Sorry I'm bottom tier and there are 12 Worcesters on the enemy team. Sorry you guys went and threw your ships away pushing when you were outnumbered. Sorry none of you BBs know how to stay near an AA cruiser. I'm glad this rework is happening despite preferring the old RTS feel. Now I can actually play a class that interests me without having to do literally everyone's job and hold your hand the entire time I carry the team. And when I do where's my compliment huh? RIP CVs as we know them, and good riddance.
  4. Proposal – Improved Unique Commanders Bonuses/Talents setup WOWS has two types of Commanders: Legendary and Unique Commanders. Unique Commanders have a bonus/talent that applies in all types of matches (random battles, co-op, clan, operations etc.). Legendary Commanders have a bonus/talent that does not apply in clan battle matches but does apply in all other types of matches. Legendary Commanders: Isoroku Yamamoto, Nikolay Kuznetsov, William Halsey Unique Commanders: Quan Rong, Da Rong, Franz von Jütland, Reinhart von Jütland, Vasily Znamensky, Viktor Znamensky, Charles-Henri Honore, Jean-Jacques Honore, Bert Dunkirk, Jack Dunkirk, George Doe, John Doe and four variants of Alexander Ovechkin This proposal concerns the Unique Commanders, NOT the Legendary Commanders. A major disadvantage of the current setup of the Unique Commanders is that they have a fixed set of bonuses/talents. That leaves the player no choice. All Unique Commanders have bonuses/talents that makes them only suitable for one class of ship. That is highly regrettable considering that Unique Commanders can only be acquired by either investing a lot of time or real world money (golden doubloons). The current Unique Commanders have bonuses/talents that makes them mostly suitable for assignment to Battleships and/or Cruisers. A minority of the Unique Commanders is – arguably - suited for assignment on Destroyers. Some countries have Unique Commanders with bonuses/talents that really only makes them suitable for assignment on one class of ship and none of the other classes. Currently the typical bonuses/talents for Unique Commanders give a +14% to +50% advantage for 2x Commander Skills (3x skills for the two British Unique Commanders). Most of the Unique Commanders have a +50% bonus/talent for varying Commander Skills. This proposal tries to address the absence of a choice in bonuses/talents choice for Unique Commanders: - All Unique Commanders will get a +X% bonus on the FIRST THREE skills that the PLAYER chooses to invest Skill Points in. - The +X% that is proposed is +50% or could alternatively be +40%. - When introducing the above there would be a free Unique Commander Skill reset, the reset would be for Unique Commanders only. - Needless to say: the current three Legendary Commanders and the standard Commanders would not be affected by this change. For all existing Unique Commanders this would be an improvement, meaning that those bought with Golden Doubloons would not be weakened by introducing the changes proposed above. Additional information on the Unique and Legendary Commanders can be found here: https://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Ship:Unique_Commanders What do you, the players, think about this proposal? Are you happy with having NO CHOICE in the current Unique Commander bonuses/talents? Would you like to instead have A CHOICE by selecting the bonuses/talents for your Unique Commanders yourself?
  5. Link to photo "We are aware. As 0.8.5 changes have brought much needed and requested AA DPS consistency, it seems like in many cases the plane losses became slightly excessive, and overall CV efficiency was nerfed too much. While we do like the change, we still need to keep CV efficiency reasonable. Over the weekend and early next week we intend to observe the situation very closely, determine the amount of needed changes to plane HP, and implement a hotfix. Unfortunately, only live server data will help us to polish the change, preserving its core concept – more rewarding and meaningful anti-air defense. Stay tuned for more news, and we sincerely apologize for any inconvenience." That is the official response from the EU forum regarding the current SITREP of the CV change. I'm not being fastidious, but if WG insists on only using "live server data" to make their decisions on anything to do with Warships game (which is probable). Then how about the CV players fudge their CV stats during "the weekend and early next week", to feed data to their "Game Balance designer" dude. Maybe the pendulum will swing to the other extreme if this temporary exercise is actually done by all CV players (or most). At best, we will at least put to bed that "live server data" is only what is actually used to determine the changes of any ships (past & present & future) by WG theory. So what say you CV players?
  6. Hello everyone I m an active player and I currently own most of the high tier battleships and cruisers in the game and I m a big fan of secondary armament. However, as everyone knows already, the secondaries are terribly underpowered, even if you invest a huge amount of resources, time and experiences ( module, flag, and 14-18points captain ), they still feel underwhelming to use. Personally, I would like to see a global, across the board secondary buff to all ships in the game, such as giving the effect of secondary mod 1 to all ship, and a change to the dispersion formula for secondary armaments. Of course, we need the buff their range. These are just my personal opinions and I would like to know what you guys all think of the current state of secondaries in World of Warships. . Edit: I think that there is one easy way to improve secondaries and make them feel a lot better to use: Simple make the secondaries shoot other targets when using Manual secondary, but the target not selected manual won't have the accuracy buff from the captain skill.
  7. Another member was messaging me about the rework debate recently. In the course of the discussion he mentioned all the buffs DDs had received recently and how nothing will make DD players happy. He listed the BB AP nerf, radar nerf, air detection buff, and so on. I'm not surprised, we hear about these "buffs" all the time. When I told him these weren't actually buffs as DDs didn't get any perceivable increase to their performance, as per the data. He was less than impressed. Let's take a look at the what the numbers are. We'll start with the BB AP nerf that was supposed to be a massive buff to DDs (claims that DDs could now yolo BBs with no consequence). The data I'll be using is form the Maple Syrup stat site, and all data is for the NA server. I'll include a link at the end of this post. For those that don't already know Maple Syrup gathers data from the WoWs API, that is data WG makes publicly available. This data is straight from WG, and its 100% accurate. With that out of the way, let's get back to the BB AP nerf. When this change went live I checked the data and saw no increase in DD survival, or average damage. In fact, the first week the change went live DD stats dropped. That didn't make sense to me. I don't know if DDs just had a particularly bad week or if DDs had a really good week the week before. I decided to go back four weeks before and four weeks after the change to find the averages to remove the normal fluctuation in the data week to week. Now the data made more sense, DDs had received a buff after all, and the data showed it. Four Week Averages For High Tier DDs Before and After BB AP Nerf, High Tier (T7-T10) Survival Rate Damage Before Change 29.38% 36,732 After Change 29.53% 37,339 Difference +0.15 +607 Percentage Increase +0.5% +1.6% As you can see DDs did get a buff, technically speaking. So that's one half of one percent increase in survival, and a little over one and half percent increase in damage. I think it's fair to say DDs didn't actually get any buff at all. Okay, let's look at the data during the rework, not just for DDs, but all ships types. The data is in averages before and after the rework (The before data is an average for two weeks before the rework 1/19-1/26, the after numbers are an average from the start of the rework on to the latest data from Maple Syrup 2/9-4/27, the week the rework dropped had a split of before and after data so it was excluded from the averages). During this period there was the reworked CVs, radar changes, air detection buff and other nerfs to CVs to help DDs. Here are the numbers: Average Damage by Ship Type, High Tier (T7-T10) BB CA/CL CV DD Before Rework 63,554 52,589 67,725 37,731 After Rework 62,819 51,248 65,331 35,709 Change In % -1.16% -2.55% -3.53% -5.36% You can see all ships are averaging less damage. DDs have biggest drop. I wouldn't call it massive, but DDs already had the lowest average damage. Next, survival rates. Average Survival By Ship Type, High Tier (T7-T10) BB CA/CL CV DD Before Rework 34.53% 31.38% 66.78% 29.01% After Rework 33.84% 30.69% 72.90% 27.81% Change in % -2.01% -2.17% +9.17% -4.13% All ships except CVs have a lower survival rate. DDs have the biggest drop again. Place your bets now if you think this is going to be a trend. Average XP BY Ship Type, High Tier (T7-T10) BB CA/CL CV DD Before Rework 1437 1458 1430 1425 After Rework 1491 1502 1760 1424 Change in % +3.76% +3.07% +23.08% -0.01% All ships get an increase in XP, except DDs. Look at that increase for CVs. Average Games Played Per Week By Ship Type, High Tier (T7-T10) BB CA/CL CV DD Before Rework 401,368 363,032 16,942 264,596 After Rework 298,131 310,744 46,842 180,671 Change in % -25.72% -14.40% +176.48% -31.72% As we can see there is a disproportionate change in games played between the increase in CV play and decrease in all other ships, meaning, the decrease isn't only players playing CVs more now, its players playing less games. Now, I'm not making any claims about a drop in population outside the normal fluctuation throughout the year. The point is to show it is DDs that are disproportionately played less than the other surface ships. Its no surprise given the big changes in DD play in the CV heavy meta. The point of all of this isn't make it sound like its the end of the world for DDs, because it not. The point is to show all of the so-called "buffs" were only to prevent DD stats from dropping even farther. I hope this helps everyone to have a better understand of the numbers as move forward in our discussions. Good luck out there. Link to Maple Syrup site: http://maplesyrup.sweet.coocan.jp/wows/index.html For those that like pictures, line charts tracking the data.
  8. nastydamnanimal

    MM rework POLL !!

    OK how many of you want the MM to be as follows.... Random MM mechanics = same tier and same average xp average xp can be found in your service record btw. Low xp Premium and Armory ship buyers will also have to climb the xp ladder. There is a bunch of them so they will just have to play against eachother and bot fillers until their average xp improves opening up more full pvp no bot filler random games. this is a poll so dont flame me just vote maybe WG will listen? thanks
  9. How to Play CV Rework Changes: Table of Contents: 1. Introduction. The rework is truly upon us. With such a major change coming to the game, there are probably many people who aren't aware what can be done, how to even play, or even know it's happening. To this end, I have gone over what can be done in the rework a lot, testing ideas from people and even theory crafting my own. I have been the carrier and the ship trying to maximize the potential and exploit the game to a high level in these interactions. I don’t have the patience of LWM to show you the tiny details, so instead I will focus on the overall effect of ships vs carrier, and the players behind them, while also discussing the best ways to combat from either side. Take note that I only spent my time in tier 8-10, against as many actual players I could find and I will be using video examples taken from my twitch to explain everything that I will be talking about here (there are vulgarities in the example videos, you have been warned). If you like the effort put into this, and want to see me in action, follow the channel here. https://www.twitch.tv/pulicat Also note that when I say Ships, I mean non-CV ships. 2. The Carrier Experience. In my time playing the CV’s, I actually had a good time. The gameplay lines up much better with what it’s like playing other classes, the controls and events are fluid, and the visuals are great especially with the new perspective. I’ve seen a lot of complaints from players saying it’s boring, that all you do is just attack over and over the same way. Perhaps they are just people who only play the old carriers, but if they aren’t they should take a second look. You control 1 thing, and use concealment, positioning and accuracy to attack the enemy and avoid damage in return, exactly like every other class. However, the difference is in how you attack. Ships in the game simply throw their shells and torps at each other and whittle down the only HP bar they have. Carriers fight in this way, but they are not fought in this way. The CVs have 3 separate HP bars, the one that’s applied to their hull, their plane reserves, and their plane HP. The plane HP is what you fight to fend off an individual attack, and at most a squadron can use ½ or 2/3 of the maximum strikes before plane risk is too high. Every plane that escapes, no matter it’s health, is a full HP plane later, which brings us to the second HP bar, the carriers reserves. This is probably the closest resemblance you can find to the HP of a normal ship going down over time. The more plane kills you can get, the more you are actually hurting the CV, but it’s important to keep in mind that the CV is regenerating the reserve HP by about 1-2 planes per squadron for every attack it sends out. If the CV player is using all their squads, you will want at least 4-6 plane kills done to every squad in order to outpace the regeneration. That is what the actual hull HP of the carrier is doing, a floating factory that once you finally kill, you put it out of commission for good. This gives the CVs a big advantage against another ship. Overall, I think there will be a portion of players that enjoy the new carriers, like DD players as they play very similar now. Both quick and low alpha damage (so they say), weak against group focus. It makes a lot of sense that WG decided to branch the carrier tech tree off of Destroyers when you think about it like that. 3. The Carrier Balance, IJN vs USN. Feels mostly like brains vs brawn. IJN have less but stronger and faster torps, AP bombs and comparatively slow attack craft with less rockets. Their planes are weaker overall, and the AP bombs suffer to this. USN on the other hand focuses on saturating the target with more in their payload in exchange for less damage. Their attack craft are much faster but the bombers much slower, and all squads more durable. It’s the much more DoT (damage over time) focused of the two, but there are methods for both nations to cripple opponents with DoTs. The Tier 10s are a different matter entirely however. Their deck armor makes it so that the only effective squad to ‘cv snipe’ them with is torpedo planes, which can be dodged. Here is an example of 2 tier 10 CV trying to snipe me from the start of the game. I am completely without allied support, fending for myself. After I take a big hit because I was just sitting still not caring, I start actively countering and they can never finish the job. I end up killing 50 planes. Example: Being CV sniped by 2 enemy carriers. Unfortunately, at other tiers, CV snipe is still possible, but at least unlikely. It’ll take them some time since you are so far away, and your summon fighter and plane fighters make it so an enemy squad can only attack you once before being swarmed down, it’s simply not a viable strategy to winning the game unless the kill is confirmed in 2-3 attacks. 4. Basic Carrier Gameplay. It’s fairly straightforward in terms of controls. You can use WASD for movement, and mouse aiming for fine tuning. It will probably take some time to adjust to the mouse aiming, as you will find it doing it automatically while you're just looking around. If you use right click to lock your guns and look around playing a ship, this same thing works for planes. When attacking another class of ship, it's important to use the correct aircraft for the job. When attacking destroyers, Attack Planes have the easiest time. The damage may not always be great, but keep in mind they're not always going to be trying to dodge only you as you are keeping them spotted. Torpedo Bombers are good for dropping into smoke, but a moving DD will be a very tough target. Dive Bombers are the least useful, but that doesn't mean it's impossible to hit. When attacking cruisers, Attack Planes are once again your best choice. They are quick enough to take less damage within enemy AA auras, have reliable damage, and don't care too much about enemy angling. Dive Bombers can be a good choice as well, especially AP bombs. Stationary cruisers camping islands will be a prime target for DBs. Torpedo Bombers are least effective, as they are slow and dodgable for a cruiser. When attacking battleships, literally everything works. They are not maneuverable enough to dodge attacks well, and can be harassed effectively. 4-1. Starting an Attack Run and the Grey Marker. That grey marker is very important, far beyond just where the attack lines up. The grey marker represents the point at which your planes will achieve full accuracy with their aim during the attack run if you do not debuff the accuracy with moving. Example: Grey Marker Represents Full Aim Note where the grey marker is when I start the attack run, and you will see it lines up with where I get full aim. 4-2. Do Not Move When Starting an Attack Run. This is key. Get in as close as possible to your target with the grey marker lined up, make sure your mouse is centered on it and do not WASD or mouse move and you will achieve full aim in the shortest amount of time, leaving you less exposed in your limited attack run movement. If you happen to overshoot with the marker slightly, you can hold slow down (Skey) and this will not affect your aim negatively, but give you more time to aim. This does expose you to flak however. Example: Don't Move While Aiming Also, if there are a lot of ships with AA, it will affect your aim time. 4-3. Don’t Be Greedy. Most people will probably learn over time, but if you go through with a strike and more than half your planes are yellow HP or less, just send them home. It’s honestly not worth crippling your late game potential if you lose your planes by trying to turn around and get another strike. If you are squad shortening, you can always just launch the same squad and get back there. Your games are long in CVs, be patient and think of the long game. 4-4. Do not bother with pre-emptive on-summon fighter drops. They are better saved for BBs that have used DCP. Tell your BBs to either say they used DCP or use a quick command to ask for AA support. If you see bombers flying around, don’t try to drop a fighter on them. It simply does not engage fast enough and will be wasted. They are also good for yourself in the late game, which may become very cv vs cv. The consumables will fill the gaps of the one for your CV. Example: Dropping fighters on enemy planes doesn't work. 4-5. Using Attack Runs Defensively. In certain situations, you may find use to use the attack run to lower your planes closer to the water. You can duck behind certain islands to avoid enemy AA guns, or even from being spotted entirely. It's important to note that currently you can't cancel an attack run in progress, but you aren't usually locked out of attacking again for very long. So it's possible to attack run to sneak in, exit attack run for your approach, and then start the actual attack run. This was requested to be added in by @MaliceA4Thought. 5. Advanced Carrier Techniques. This is the section I believe most people will be interested in. Over my time playing I tried existing strategies I heard of and even came up with a couple on my own that have potential to be really strong options. 5-1. Hakuryu Stealth Torping and Sequential Dropping. Everyone probably knows about this one by now. With the 8km torps and full conceal, you are able to drop torpedoes 7km away from a target, and turn away holding the S key to never be spotted by him. Though the torps are slow, people still land torpedoes with ships like the Sims or Black. This will be very potent against ships that like to hug islands, bow tanking or are otherwise relatively immobile. Sequential drops are very potent too, as the torps are extremely stealthy. Once you get good at aiming the lead and predicting opponent reaction, you will hit them. And with the spacing on the torps, you may be able to reapply flood after they DCPed one in the first wave, all without losing a single torp bomber. Examples: Stealth Torping. Sequential Dropping 5-2. Squad Shortening. This is one of mine, as far as I know nobody has tried this or talked about it at all. The idea is when you launch a fresh squadron, you immediately drop a payload to send the planes back home. This is best used in 2 situations. At the start of the game, you can shorten your attack plane scouts to half so it’s easier to dodge in the long-range flak bubbles, and to make sure you can launch a full squad of the same type right behind landing the ones you’re on. The applications are limited because, even though you are able to dodge flak easier, continuous AA damage will have less planes to work over. The effect of continuous is best explained in this thread here made by @Edgecaseand @GoldPile. You might be able to get more use out of Last Gasp this way too. 5-3. Forcing DCP. As we all know, a flood is usually an instant DCP for any ship that suffers one. Using the above trick to fly around with 2 torp strikes instead of 3 and having a full squad at home, you can try to dive through heavier AA to get one torp strike on a BB and fly away with Last Gasp. If you flood that BB, he’s going to have to DCP it. Land the rest of your weakened torp planes and launch a full hp squad to do the same thing again. It is nearly impossible to stop a full HP squadron from coming in and attacking once, but it is very possible to stop a second strike from the same group. This method gets around that limitation, and can guarantee anywhere from 30-40s of uninterrupted flood damage, plus two torp plane strikes worth of damage on a BB. And that’s assuming they’re running premium DCP with max cooldown reduction. On top of that, you will barely lose any torp planes. Very viable but the window is short and you must be able to launch enough torp planes to field nearly 2 full squads at one time. Take care of your reserves. Example: DCP Forcing. I have taken the flooding mechanic changes into account for this technique, and have determined it will still be effective and potentially more. 5-4. Abusing Flak Spawns (Plinko Flak). Flak is the deadliest thing to you, obviously, and sometimes the flak walls spawn too long for you to go around. A lot of the time I see this complaint, the planes are flying right at their target, so the flak wall spawns between you and the target forcing you to fly around and mess up your attack run. One thing to note is that the flak spawns in front of you, not always between you and the target. This can be abused, and with the name Plinko you probably already understand. When approaching a target, use boost to go full speed at an angle to the target ship. When the inevitable flak wall spawns, release boost, turn to another angle and boost again as if you were just rolling off the wall to the side. You can adjust how you want to plinko the flak based on how your opponent is maneuvering against you, but it is an extremely reliable way to not only mitigate flak damage, but potentially remove it entirely, including defensive fire. Examples: Plinko ex.1 Plinko ex.2 Plinko ex.3 6. The Ship Experience. The workload here has gone up. Now everything you knew about the game must be considered with carriers. No longer will CVs appear once every 5 or 10 games. It will be common to see at least 1v1, and probably a lot of 2v2 coming right out of the patch, especially with a new carrier line coming out in 0.8.1. Unfortunately most of my experience fighting other ships with carriers around was against bots in PTS. Even with that limited experience, I don't think fighting carriers will be much different as it is with RTS CVs. It can be slightly satisfying when you see the big red damage numbers done to planes, but after a while it became a bit hollow. The CV is still just fighting against a mechanic, not against me directly. As much as I really wish for direct control over my AA so that it's really ME he is fighting, I think this would be too much for a good amount of players to handle without suffering. Now before you start saying that's crazy talk, people should either be able to handle it or be punished, I would agree with you IF there was skill based matchmaking. At least then, the players with lower capabilities would fight people of similar skill only, and what they would or wouldn't be able to do wouldn't be as unfair. I don't find it unreasonable to give some concessions to those players since they are forced to play against really good players. Back on topic to Automated AA however, having the entire interaction with another class be automated is fairly frustrating at times. I can think of a couple unobtrusive ways where a player can have more interaction with the aircraft, and that will be below where I suggest mechanic additions. Overall, carriers and ships interact the same way, it will just be much more frequent now since they will appear in more games. There will be some system shock at first, and I have no doubt that gameplay will settle and be balanced around it over time. Whether I want to be a ship in that gameplay however remains to be seen, and right now it's sitting at a no. 7. Defending Yourself from Airstrikes. Stay near ships with defensive fire if you don’t have one, don’t get engaged by planes when you can’t maneuver much, and be very careful with your DCP. At the start of 0.8.0, a lot of players won’t be experienced yet and you may not notice their effect all that much. They will probably lose a lot of planes doing things they shouldn’t, and be out of reserves for late game. Don’t let that fool you, good carriers will be deadly as ever, and nothing but the longest flak walls, highest continuous damage and most bizarre maneuvering will stop them. Using your defensive fire or catapult planes should not always be used just because you have them active. Saving them for more dangerous squad types, or protecting yourself from follow up attacks while your DCP is down would be better than trying to defensive fire rocket planes as soon as you see them. When Attack Planes are coming for you, their main goal is your soft spots. The biggest one being your superstructure. To describe how they launch rockets, I will use Shokaku as an example. They launch rockets within their elliptical as 2, and then 8, followed by the last 2 in a straight line. This means that broadsiding the incoming attack planes is exactly what they want you to do. Try to show the least amount of profile possible while still keeping them in your sector to fight against them the best. With Torpedo planes, the same can be applied. Show the least amount of profile as possible while maintaining your sector on them. You also want to try to turn towards them if you can, because this will reduce the amount of time the torpedoes are around you and reducing your movement options. If you turn away, it sets up potential for the enemy cv to cross drop you, since torpedoes move slower and they'll box you in longer. With Dive bombers, their preferred angle is with you pointing directly toward or away from them. At least the tech tree ones. Give them as much broadside as possible. 7-1 Beating CVs with the Numbers. What it comes down to now is minimizing the enemy CVs effect on you and the game as much as possible. Any amount of time waste and plane reserve hits you can cause to the enemy are victories. Even if they are small, they all add up, and wasting their time is good since they are focused on damage over time. Remember, even though there will be more players in carriers that you will see often, there will be a balance between good and bad ones, so it may not always be so bad fighting against a carrier. 7-2 DDs vs Carriers. Destroyers will still have to be careful early game, because attack planes can still hurt even if they don't delete you. Try to take a more cautious approach to caps, so as not to be spotted in the open by planes and be attacked by both them and enemy ships. Watch out for torpedo planes assisting in cross dropping your smoke. 7-3 Early Sector Switching. When under attack by a squadron, and you know they will pass over to your other side, try to learn the timing of your sector switch delay to line it up so it switches right when they pass over. This will maximize your sector, and there is no AA loss in switching. It will take some time to get it right, but every little bit will help. 7-4 The Downtier Experience. Be really careful when you are bottom tier against a CV as well. It's really hard to defend yourself alone against strong planes, almost to the point where it seems unfair. I hope WG puts more focus onto this area of balance. The downtier experience To judge whether or not you were successful in fighting off a plane attack, a good rule of thumb would be expecting 3 plane kills and upwards to even have a noticeable effect on his reserves per attack. If the enemy carrier is smart though, he will just land his planes before he loses too much. The best you can expect most of the time is to make sure you only get attacked once by the entire squadron, and try to mitigate the damage from that 1 attack as best you can. 8. Possible Mechanic Additions. One thing that is really strong right now is using the land command for your squadron right after an attack. Your planes disappear so quickly that the enemy can’t really shoot you down. Something that would be good is adding a similar effect of strafing out of a fighter lock. Losing a plane doing so, or taking a lot of damage from AA if you use the land command inside short or medium range AA. This would at least give the ships more of a chance to destroy planes and some punishment or risk to pulling the land maneuver (flying high into the sky sharply) right over enemy AA. I also think that since fires on CV only last 5s, the DCP auto consumable should never activate for them. A player would never use it for that, even if they somehow happened to have 4 fires going, that would not come close to the damage of a normal fire on anything else. Even if there are players that would want the auto use to activate for a single fire, it would just do them more harm than good. In respect to the lack of interaction for ships in fighting aircraft, one thing that would be doable is re-implement ctrl-click aircraft, and have a delay of 3-4 seconds between each time you are able to click to add in a couple bonus ticks of continuous damage. Nothing that will disrupt the balance, but at least add some player action = impact. Another thing that could help with that would be to add a fourth attack mode, being AA. Picture the mode you get for torpedoes, a large cone representing the limits of your aim, and a smaller one showing you where you are aiming within that cone. The smaller cone would increase the damage for any aircraft that are inside it (above it), and the large aim limits would just be your AA auras. This would not only be a better and more interactive system than what I just mentioned above, but this would also be better than the sector system. The smaller aim cone could be 1/4 or even 1/6 of your AA aura, like a slice of pie. You could lock it in place with the key used to activate the sector system now, so you could do other things, or take direct control during an attack to maximize the damage you do to the planes. You yourself fighting a CV while it is attacking you. This isn't quite as far as real control over your AA, but it would line up well with existing gameplay and reduce the automated RNG of your AA that is your entire interaction with another class. By @NCC81701, Have you thought about viability to adding manual control to altitude and AA similar to subs? Say for High altitude drop is less accurate but takes less damage from Short/Mid AA but low altitude attack is more accurate but take more damage from Short/Mid AA. The player ship then have to judge/decide the altitude level of the large caliber AA/flack burst. if it's at the correct altitude it does bonus damage. Cooldown will be present for changing the altitude of both planes and large caliber AA of course. 9. General Thoughts. Overall, I enjoyed my experience playing CVs, the same cannot be said for playing ships against them however. I feel that the gameplay of WoWs is much more strategic and enjoyable without CVs in random battles, and a lot of that is lost with them. When CVs are around, they dominate the no-mans land, and nothing can really contest this. Even if the CV can no longer one shot you, it doesn't change the environment they cause. This will really be felt if WG puts in 2v2 CV matches. If WG happens to read this, I really think you should limit it to 1v1 for at least 0.8.0, and then evaluate the effect from live to consider if upping the amount for 0.8.1 is warranted. I know this will impact the amount of people trying to play CV in 0.8.0 and the queue times, but 2v2 would really put negative opinions in people's minds as they experience it as ships, no matter how balanced you might think it is. Being attacked by a carrier is not something people will enjoy, and doubling that occurrence is risky for tolerance. 10. Thank You. I hope this Guide/Opinion piece was useful to you. I put a lot of work into it over the course of the week, and tried to make it as unbiased and fair as possible. I ask that you share this with people in the game so they too can get a handle on this new gameplay, and if you have questions or want to counterpoint what I’m saying, I’m always glad to respond. You can either comment to this thread or talk to me in Twitch. Also, feel free to argue points made here or by other people commenting, but keep it civil so this thread remains unlocked and open for discussion. Special Thanks to: @HellaCopterRescue for putting up with my long rants and playing Devil’s Advocate, along with helping me test things for video. This guide would not be what it is without his help. @Kousatsu for assistance behind the scenes ensuring this guide was well structured. @Carrier_Hornet for playing CV for me so I could play ships in PTS and guarantee carrier games. @Warlord78 and @Ponymagistrate for reviewing this guide among other things.
  10. What I'm referring to in this instance is where it says that you won't be able to launch aircraft for a period of time at the beginning of a match. Since it didn't provide a specific time, I'm curious: How long will that waiting period be? Will it be short and sweet at about 10-20 seconds, or will it be more prolonged, between 30 seconds and a minute? As a CV player, I think that having to wait a full minute to get my planes in the air would not be very fun. Of course people who hate CVs would love that, but then again they'd also love if CV players were only able to launch their planes in the last 10 seconds of a match, so I don't really listen to them. Anyways, does anyone know just how long the waiting period will be? Thanks in advance to anyone who provides an answer to my question. Sincerely, 1Sherman.
  11. Buenas señores: El rework de los portas traen sentimientos encontrados entre los jugadores, es cierto que es mucho mas atractivo poder ver el combate y dirigir tus aviones, pero, no es lo mejor. la finalidad del rework era atraer a los jugadores a la unidad menos popular de wows, y sinceramente, no lo han logrado, aviones débiles, fuego AA imposible de atravesar, el horrible tiempo de reposición de los aviones una vez que los pierdes, la delicada estabilidad de la mira, el horrible balance de partidas (ejemplo CV tier 8 vs barcos tier 10) y la aun enorme brecha entre portas estadounidenses y japoneses no hacen nada amigable y cercana la experiencia de los cv´s. Con la integración de los portaaviones ingleses dudo que cambie la cosa, serán los mismos aviones, los mismos sistemas de ataque pero con otra bandera, y para ser sinceros, y todos sabemos esto, es solo una estrategia de marketing la incorporación de los portas ingleses, pues saben que muchos los compraran. No se que opinan ustedes señores, yo no soy un jugador experimentado de portas, pero esperaba que esta actualización lograra encantarme, y no fue así, y siendo sinceros antes de seguir agregando barcos deber hacer algo con el sistema que ya cuentan, pues sinceramente deja mucho que desear. bueno para terminar 3 cosas: 1.- Espero ver la opinión de otros jugadores. 2.- Así es mi balance cada vez que uso el portaaviones. 3.- ¿No creen que los aviones japoneses deberían tener la opción de kamikaze como ataque? (seria útil y divertido a la vez,) Gracias por su tiempo.
  12. What recent changes to the game did you like least of all (in the two latest Updates — 0.8.0 and 0.8.1)? The fact that cvs are very under powered and AA is lethal, your planes are made of wet cardboard, the fact that your wing just evaporate in contact with some ships AA and you get deplaned very fast if not careful, the fact you cant choose the size of your wing, the fact that the AA system is quite unbalanced and ships AA can still hit your planes outside of their AA range and behind islands, the fact that even WG recognizing the air spotting inside the AA range problem they made it less worse so that you can see ships before you get in the AA range but you dont have space to turn back without taking damage................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... and worse of all WG said you can dodge flak but you cant dodge flak(you can dodge some flak but not all) you are flying your wing and you see in your front black clouds of flak an explosions and on the left and in the right how do you dodge that if you press F your wing gets deleted you can dodge that with bombers and torpedo bombers but you cant cancel your attack so i say [edited].
  13. So the REEE-work(thanks Yuro) is quite bad i mean right now the only cvs worth the trouble are the Midway and the Lexinton(when MM actually puts you against your own tier...... and it's not full of AA ships and they are not all bunched up) also after the hotfix(that only made things worse) made rocket planes useless and all other planes meh at best things are looking quite grim i mean rocket planes have now increased "readying" to shoot time and against most dds you need to have RPF or shoot them on the second pass to be successful also turn and shoot is broken now and you can only fire in straight lines; Air detection is now mostly inside the AA range of ships meaning that to spot a ship to your team is to take damage and you can't dodge flak(i mean you can try if you attack but then you can't disengage) AND that cost is 1000 credits for each plane you lose and being de-planed is still a thing and finally now that they increased the height that the planes need to reach to stop taking AA damage if you press F your entire wing gets deleted but if you have a successful attack(WG said something like this"we want to reward successful attacks and discourage returning you planes inside inside the AA umbrella of an enemy" but is useless because in both you take damage anyway ) your planes get deleted anyway.
  14. It definitely looks enticing for new players while also allowing the existing CV veterans to flourish. The new rocket-armed attack planes look cool as anything. My big concern, however, is that iChase says that you can dodge the long-range AA fire. This may just be me, but I'm a little worried that that will mean that Defensive Fire on cruisers like the Baltimore I just bought will be largely useless until it's too late. Otherwise, I think it looks OK.
  15. First there may be a thread already on the topic so sorry if this is redundant 🙄. What are the best Module and Captain Skills configuration for the Midway? Also, I know there are some special captains that may have additional bonuses for it so if anyone has some insight on that I'd appreciate it. I have decent success in my Midway, but I'm always looking for ways to improve. I appreciate any information you can provide, thanks.
  16. I have an idea on how to get us all out of this CV mess and still make WG and their precious CVs work...at least the spotting/concealment part which has led to DD pain and severe punishment to anyone that happens to wander off which has led to overall campy gameplay. Changes to concealment: CV planes detect ships as they do now but they only have the ability to transmit that information to a ship within 7km of the planes doing the spotting. Beyond 7km the only data that is passed on is a generic map marker (not an actual ship type icon) Example: CV rocket planes spot red Gearing 3.5km due north. CV can attack and so can the friendly Seattle that is located 7km south of the planes. The Zao that is 10km behind the planes only sees a dot appear on the minimap. All the friendly campy campersons and the rest of the gang on the other side of the map are oblivious to this engagement but they will also have a dot appear on their minimaps. If Gearing pulls the attack planes north a bit, Seattle loses surface contact but rocket planes can still attack at will or break off and go somewhere else if smoke is deployed. Why this is good: + from a spotting perspective this is closer to being back to pre-rework levels for surface ships. Unless there is a plane overhead and close enough to both detect and transmit the surface ships must spot and fight for themselves. + this skill would also be active to any fighters that the CV drops off as well. Might be nice as an area denial tool while the CV can attack elsewhere (until those fighters get shot down of course). + promotes aggression - the ships that want to hunt (Mino, some DDs, 2ndary build BBs) and take chances can stick close to the planes. DDs can get some of their aggression back knowing they may have to deal with rockets but they wont have to deal with the whole red team firing at them. + Might be some cool teamwork - A coordinated push by a group of surface ships with CV planes flying close air support and spotting a short distance ahead of them. + Solves the only real problem DDs face with post rework gameplay (quit crying about rockets) in that it is only at worst as bad as radar and at best it is a private fight between a single squadron and the DD. + CV play itself is pretty much unchanged while at the same time getting back toward pre-rework surface fighting. CV pilots weren't getting much XP reward for spotting anyway and constantly getting hassled for INTELLIGENCE DATA. With this they can be good team players while at the same time mainly focused on dealing their own damage. It's up to the surface ship to choose whether to keep up...not the CV player to feed them while they stay at the back. Other thoughts on current state of game: + Both sides seem to be equally unhappy about AA so it is probably just about right. I think the AA changes were perfect with DOT instead of flak bursts. Now the plane HP needs to be adjusted (slight buffs needed imo) + Plane attacks - buff aerial torp Alpha damage: Torp attacks are the riskiest/longest/highest skill attack of the three. Planes need to be better rewarded when they get a hit with a torp. DONT CHANGE THE AIM TIME/BLOOM ANYMORE (except maybe a tiny bit of a buff to American CV torp planes). Rockets seem to be about right - a bit of a buff wouldn't be terrible but it would need to come with some sort of aiming bloom that needs more skill than the current easy mode rocket attack model. Bombs seem to be the perfect balance between a skilled attack and good damage dealt. TO BE CLEAR, the above is with current .8.2 in mind. If planes or AA is monkeyed with to a level below/beyond where they are currently I would most likely have different opinions So...what do you all think?
  17. Here is a technical paper I wrote on my feedback for the CARRIER REWORK CAPTAIN SKILLS 8.0.1. I decided to put it in this format to give the best feedback I can. I have not looked at other lists or posts, so there may be redundant items. I don’t expect everyone to find the same bugs as I, have the same experience, or agree with my following suggestions. CV REWORK CAPTAIN SKILLS 8.0.1 FEEDBACK BY Bigs The following is feedback on the CV Captain Skills items found in 8.0.1: As Currently, all aircraft carrier captain skills are working as intended by their description. However, I would like to add that there are some Captain skills that either feel very underwhelming for their cost, or so powerful that they are must haves for their cost (in some cases, they are too cheap for what they do.) Below is a list of the Captain Skills that I would like to highlight for this feedback. I didn't list ALL of the Captain Skills available to be taken as a Carrier Player, only the ones that I feel need to be addressed, or changed. 1. Air Supremacy – “Accelerates aircraft Servicing” - Aircraft Restoration -5% a. This skill is valuable to all carriers and for 1 captain skill point, its balanced for what it does. Grants you a small boost to “generating” new aircraft from the hanger. i. I wouldn’t change this skill. 2. Direction Center for Fighters – “when fighter consumable is activated, an additional aircraft is launched” – Number of Aircraft +1 a. I don’t really find this skill to be useful on most carriers…or if at all. It does create a slightly better defense fighter for your carrier, but it doesn’t affect anything else. Coupled with strong Anti-Aircraft capabilities by all carriers, it’s an underwhelming skill for what it does. While it is nice to have the fighters shoot down 1 extra bomber when being attacked, its no more a “filler” skill than anything else...and a poor one at that. b. Now regarding surface ships, this is a valuable skill as-is, and one I would recommend if you are wanting some extra anti-aircraft capabilities since there are a lot of planes flying around. For its value, you get a lot of good defense out of it when you really need that extra protection. c. Please see my suggestions at the end of this feedback. 3. Improved Engine Boost – “Increases the engine boost time for the aircraft carrier’s squadrons” – Engine boost time +10% a. This skill, while useful for speeding up your squadrons, also can help give you more time to slow down your squadrons. It’s a pretty useful skill overall for what it does, but it isn’t so powerful that it’s a “must have”. It’s in a nice place of being a “convenient” skill for some players and a hard pass for others. i. I wouldn’t change this skill. 4. Last Gasp – “Completely restores the engine boost for the last attack flight of the aircraft carrier’s planes” – Engine Boost restored to full a. The Last Gasp is a must have ability for carrier’s…its extremely powerful for its points cost given that on your last attack wave, you get instantly refilled on your engine boost allowing you to do a very aggressive attack run at full speed, or you can use the boost to get away out of AA range to safely call these planes home. i. Please see my suggestions at the end of this feedback. 5. Torpedo Acceleration – “Increases the speed of torpedoes launched from both ships and aircraft by reducing torpedo range” – Ship Torpedo Speed +5kt, Aerial Torpedo Speed +5kt, Ship torpedo range -20%, Aerial torpedo range -20% a. This skill has always been useful for carriers in the past, but its also never been a “must have” skill either. It, like Improved Engine Boost, is a convenience skill. Some take it, some don’t. i. I wouldn’t change this skill. 6. Improved Engines – “Increases the speed of the carrier’s squadrons” – Squadron speed +2.5% a. This skill is useful, but it isn’t a “must have” skill. There aren’t many other “better” choices at this tier, so while its “balanced” amongst the other tier skills, I feel it doesn’t go enough for the cost. i. Please see my suggestions at the end of this feedback. 7. Adrenaline Rush – “Increases the reload speed of all armaments as the ship’s HP decreases. Increases the speed of the aircraft carrier’s squadrons as the aircrafts HP decreases” – Reload time reduction for all types of armament for each 1% of HP lost -0.2% , Squadron speed increase for each 1% of HP lost +0.2% a. Adrenaline Rush is a very nice skill to have on any aircraft carrier. The reload speed of ship armaments is welcome, along with the speed increase for your aircraft as you lose plane HP. However, it isn’t a “must have” skill, some captains might not like having their aircraft suddenly speed up as they lose HP. I also am not sure if it reduces service time of planes as the carrier gets damaged. This would need to be clarified by Wargaming. If it does, this could be a very powerful skill for its tier. i. I wouldn’t change this skill. 8. Survivability Expert – “Increases HP of ship and aircraft, including fighters” – HP for each tier +350 , Aircraft HP for each tier +15 a. Currently given the Anti-Aircraft meta that is going on since this patch. This skill is an absolute must have, and I can see it remaining so for the foreseeable future. That said, for the skill cost, I think its pretty balanced for what you pay. i. I wouldn’t change this skill. 9. Aircraft Armor – “Decreases the continuous damage that aircraft take from short-, medium-, and long-range AA defenses” – Continuous damage from short-, medium-, and long-range AA defenses -10% a. Like Survivability Expert, this skill is a “must have” for the foreseeable future. It’s a very handy skill to take on any aircraft carrier, and its points for what you get is handy. Coupled with Survivability Expert, its pretty costly to get both, but you really do need both to have any chance of surviving the current AA meta. i. I wouldn’t change this skill. 10. Super Intendent – Increases the capacity of your ship’s consumables. Does not to the consumables of an aircraft carrier’s squadron” – Number of consumables +1 a. This skill is rather pointless to have on an aircraft carrier, but if you really want that extra fighter wave, this skill is for you. i. I do not have suggestions currently, but I don’t believe this skill to be very useful for carriers. It may just have to be a non-carrier only skill. 11. Demolition Expert – “increases the chances of setting fire to the target for the armament carried by ships and aircraft” – Chance of HE shells causing fire on target +2% , Chance of Rockets causing fire on target +1% , Chance of HE bombs causing fire on target +5% a. This skill is rather based on what nation you are taking for carriers. As Japanese, this skill isn’t very useful, unless you have the VIII Kaga premium carrier. However the American’s should always be taking this skill since it buffs up your rockets and your HE bombs, the exception being the VIII Enterprise premium carrier since it has AP bombs. i. I wouldn’t change this skill. 12. Sight Stabilization – “improved the aiming time of the aircraft carrier’s planes” – Attack aircraft aiming speed +5% , Torpedo bomber aiming speed +5% , Dive Bomber aiming speed +10% a. This skill is a “must have” since it helps reduce the time it takes to get a “accurate” attack run for all types of squadrons. I would tweak it though so that all types of aircraft get the same speed. i. Please see my suggestions at the end of this feedback. 13. Concealment Expert – “reduces the detectability range of the ship and the aircraft carrier’s squadrons” – Detectability of destroyers -10%, Detectability of cruisers -10%, Detectability of battleships -10%, Detectability of aircraft carriers -10%, Detectability of squadrons -10% a. While this may be a “must have” skill for Destroyers and Cruisers, its questionable on Battleships and Carriers. It is a useful skill since it reduces the detectability of the squadrons, which means that anti-aircraft guns won’t fire on them until they are “spotted”, so by increasing your detectability, you are shortening the amount of time a squadron starts to take incoming fire. I would value sit stabilization over this though. i. I wouldn’t change this skill. BIGS’ SUGGESTIONS: These are my suggestions for the previously discussed Captain Skills. I do not expect people to agree with my suggestions for the below Captain Skills, but hopefully they will start a discussion with Wargaming. 1. Direction Center for Fighters – “when fighter consumable is activated, an additional aircraft is launched” – Number of Aircraft +1 a. Change to: “Direction Command for Fighters – “When fighter consumable is activated, an additional aircraft is launched. Increases the Patrol Fighter consumable radius” – Number of Aircraft for Fighter Consumable +1 , Patrol Fighter consumable radius is increased by 20% i. This recommended change adds a bit more utility to the skill to make it more enticing to aircraft carriers. While it will increase +1 fighter to ship and aircraft carrier fighter consumables (as it currently does), it will also increase the squadron Patrol Fighter consumable radius, bumping it from an average of 3km to 3.6km in radius allowing a higher degree of chance that the Patrol Fighters will engage enemy squadrons. 14. Last Gasp – “Completely restores the engine boost for the last attack flight of the aircraft carrier’s planes” – Engine Boost restored to full a. Change to: “Evasive Maneuvers – “Reduces anti-aircraft damage for attack aircraft that have dropped payload.” Aircraft that have completed their attacks gain a 30% resistance to all anti-aircraft damage while returning to the Carrier. i. As-is, Last Gasp is just too powerful for what it does. It either needs to be moved to Tier 2 and swap out with Improved Engines, or as I suggest, needs to be changed to an AA damage reduction for returning aircraft that have completed their attacks. This is NOT including aircraft recalled by the player using the return key “F” or “F Spam”. Only aircraft that have completed their attack and spent their payload. This would also entice players to attack as much as possible per squadron rather than simply attacking once and returning aka, "F Spam". 15. Improved Engines – “Increases the speed of the carrier’s squadrons” – Squadron speed +2.5% a. Change to: “Improved Engines – “Completely restores the engine boost for the last attack flight of the aircraft carrier’s planes” – Engine Boost restored to full i. I strongly believe that the ability to get “full engine boost” on the last attack wave is just too powerful for its tier, and +2.5% for all squadrons at Tier 2 is just too weak of a skill. I would recommend changing Last Gasp to the “Evasive Maneuvers” skill that I suggested for Tier 1, and change the tier 2 skill, Improved Engines, to perform the same actions that “Last Gasp” does at Tier 1. This would make the skill costlier, which I think would balance it out better points wise. Any higher and it would be too costly for what it does. 16. Sight Stabilization – “improved the aiming time of the aircraft carrier’s planes” – Attack aircraft aiming speed +5% , Torpedo bomber aiming speed +5% , Dive Bomber aiming speed +10% a. Change to: “Sight Stabilization – “improved the aiming time of the aircraft carrier’s planes” – Attack aircraft aiming speed +10% , Torpedo bomber aiming speed +10% , Dive Bomber aiming speed +10% i. This skill, while nice to have as-is, doesn’t feel as useful as it could be for a Tier 10 skill. I would suggest increasing the values to all be 10%.
  18. anonym_hEPI3KAo14Zw

    WHAT HAVE YOU ALL DONE

    Almost exclusive CV Player making this comment. The new rework is ….NOT GOOD! I was never sure why you all thought there was a need for this and not sure why you wanted to integrate World of Airplanes into World of Warships....what is next, putting tanks on ships and then you can shoot ships with your tanks??? Regardless, like most entities in life, WOW won't admit that this was a horrible idea, which is what you all were told all the way through the testing phases. I am sure that you will try to improve upon the mess you made....which won't work. So, thanks for ruining this game for the CV Players. Not to be jaded and cynical, but that had to be your intent from the beginning as all the feedback I ever got was that this was just horrible.. I am just waiting the requisite amount of time before I sell all my CVs and move on. For the record, the real solution to increase CV Play was always to fix the ungodly AA at the higher tier levels. There were always plenty of CVs at the mid and lower tiers and the CV Play was always best in the 6-8 range where there was a nice balance of AA Cruisers and many CV Players.
  19. Here is a technical paper I wrote on my feedback for the CARRIER REWORK HOT FIX 8.0.1. I decided to put it in this format to give the best feedback I can. I have not looked at other lists or posts, so there may be redundant items. I don’t expect everyone to find the same bugs as I, have the same experience, or agree with my following suggestions. CV REWORK HOT FIX 8.0.1 FEEDBACK BY Bigs BUGS: 1) SOUND CUTS OUT RANDOMLY DURING TAKE OFF: This issue appears to have been resolved. I have not had it since the Hot Fix went live. 2) PLANES LOCKED INTO TURNING LEFT OR RIGHT AFTER TAKE OFF: This issue still occurs randomly…The planes will take off either steering hard left or hard right and won’t respond to controls unless you push the corresponding turning key to the direction they are turning automatically. (if they are turning hard left, you must press the "turn left" key in order to regain control, otherwise they will permanently turn left.) 3) DISAPPEARING FLAK CLOUDS STILL CAUSING DAMAGE: There are still instances where flak clouds that have “dispersed” or “ended” still cause maximum damage when flown in the area they were spawned. In other words, you are damaged by invisible flak. 4) HE/AP BOMBS LANDING OUTSIDE RETICLE: In rare occasions when you turn the plane during a dive, the bombs will land outside of the entire bomb reticle. Its as if the sigma or dispersion is set to be higher than what the visual reticle shows. 5) PAYLOADS DISAPPEARING FROM AIRCRAFT IN FLIGHT: Occasionally, aircraft with rockets or bombs will take off but visually will not be carrying any payload. This occurs randomly so it cannot be replicated by the player. I do notice it more when playing ships such as the Saipan, Lexington, and Midway. 6) PLANES RICHOCETING OFF MAP BOARDERS: This is a BIG gameplay issue…I have found that if you fly a squadron into the map boarder, they can almost instantaneously turn around, or as I call it, “Boarder bouncing” This allows a player to attack a ship close to the maps boarder, run into the boarder, turn around almost instantly, and be lined up for another attack rapidly on the same target. Planes should not be able to do this as it can be exploited to the players benefit to set up rapid attacks on a ship. The following is feedback to the Changelog items found in 8.0.1: 1) To reduce the attacking and spotting potential of Attack Aircraft against destroyers in high-tier battles, the number of aircraft in the squadron was changed to 9, and in the attack group to 3. The changes affected the aircraft carriers VIII Lexington, VIII Shokaku, X Midway, X Hakuryu. a. I have found that it is harder to spot destroyers with the reduced squadron size. b. I have found it just as easy to score hits on a destroyer, despite the reduced attack squadron size, but I deal less damage. i. I don’t feel that the damage is mitigated enough to feel “balanced” against attack fighters with the “Tiny Tim” rockets. These rockets take off a substantial amount of destroyer health per attack…I believe that making them perform “over-pen damage only" may help balance them. As-is, they can cripple a destroyer as badly as a penetrating hit from a Battleship AP shell prior to the AP over penetration fix for destroyers. 2) Increased the height which returning aircraft need to reach in order to become invulnerable to AA fire. This will allow ships to fire longer on returning aircraft and will help to counter the tactic in which the player gives the order to the squadron to return immediately after the first attack group’s run (“F” key by default). a. This change has indeed increased the overall effectiveness of AA fire against “recalled” squadrons. i. This does resolve the issue of “spam recall”. b. When a squadron is recalled within a ships AA aura, the recalled squadron can be completely eradicated in most scenarios. i. I feel that while this does resolve the issue of “spam recall” it is a pretty hefty blow to a aircraft carrier player trying to keep their planes from being completely destroyed. In many cases, unless the squadron is flown outside of enemy AA, they will be completely lost when recalled. I think that AA is too powerful in this case since a carrier can rapidly lose all of one type of bomber squadron and unable to field another squadron for a significant amount of time during a game. ii. To be clear, I am not stating this change isn’t necessary, but carriers shouldn’t be harshly punished to the point that it isn’t fun. I believe a more appropriate solution is to have planes return slower if they are recalled when inside enemy flak, or if they pass over enemy flak at high altitude increasing the time it takes to get planes that survived an attack back to the carrier for servicing. 3) Maneuvering among the AA explosions allows you to reduce the damage received from air defense, even while in the AA range of ships with powerful air defense. We redistributed the efficiency of air defense between the constant damage taken and the puffs of damage from explosions - the efficiency was increased for the former and decreased for the latter. This will keep the tactics of dodging explosions still effective, but it will not allow planes to stay too long in the range of air defense without taking significant losses, especially when attacking a formation of ships. a. I feel this change feels a lot better for surface ships defending themselves against aircraft, however, when a carrier with aircraft that are several tiers lower than the surface ship they are attacking (such as a Ryujo attacking a Cleveland), there is almost no hope that the Ryujo planes will even make it to the Cleveland. This is the case for many undertiered aircraft. i. If this change is to remain in effect, carriers should not be matched up against surface ships 2 tiers higher or lower than their carrier’s tier. They should only be matched +1 or -1 of their tier. (i.e. A Tier 8 aircraft will only face T7 or T9 ships.) 4) Changed several features of the Japanese torpedo bombers. Now, if during the preparation for the attack, the attack group maneuvers, your aim will not stabilize (aiming cone stops narrowing). And when maneuvering during an attack run - begins to widen. In order to carry out an effective attack, you need to preemptively choose the line of attack and try not to make last-minute maneuvers. a. I believe this change is a bit too much because it takes the specialty of the Japanese aircraft tree and makes it very difficult to utilize. b. I do agree that it does require players to make a more planned attack instead of last second drops. 5) Reduced the chance of flooding by approximately a third for the Japanese aerial torpedoes in tiers IV-VIII, and by half for German (tier VIII) and Japanese (tier X) aerial torpedoes. a. I feel that this change was completely necessary. 6) Significant changes have affected the alternative plane torpedo module for X Hakuryu.The attack run preparation is now longer, and more difficult - the parameters of the aiming were changed and the angles of the torpedo spread were increased even when aiming is at its most accurate. In addition, the speed of aircraft when returning to the aircraft carrier is reduced and the delay before the start of a new attack is increased. We have significantly changed the characteristics of torpedoes: reduced speed, increased detection radius and arming time. a. While this style of attack was very powerful, I feel that too much of it has changed and the Hakuryu no longer feels like a “torpedo specialist”. I feel that out of all the changes, the reduction of the torpedo speed was unnecessary. If the torpedoes maintained the same speed as before (50kts) and the detection radius was returned back to the prior setting (stealthier version) I would find the other changes actually balance this style of play. i. In short, too much of a nerf was applied to the hakuryu, especially with it now having to face a substantially tougher AA system, and that its aircraft can now be completely wiped out when recalled early. 7) To increase the effectiveness of attacks, we added resistance to AA damage for bombers at the time of readiness to attack (when the aiming indicator turns green). In this phase of the attack, all bombers will receive 30% less damage. a. I find this a welcome change since AA has become extremely powerful in this Hot Fix. b. I would also like this value applied to attacking aircraft that have completed their attack run (dropped their payload) and have broken off to return to the aircraft carrier. c. This damage reduction should not apply to aircraft that still have their payload and have been recalled to the carrier. 8) Bug fixes: the aiming for the stock attack aircraft on the carrier VI Ranger is now similar to the aiming for all American attack aircraft. The characteristics of the basic 'Fighter' consumable for V Emerald are brought to the same value as 'Fighter II' and the minimum speed of the stock Japanese bombers of all tiers does not exceed the minimum speed on the researchable bombers. a. I find that both of these changes are welcome and much needed. 9) If the ship has no 25 mm AA guns, medium-range AA defenses start at 1 km. These ships' AA configuration will now be emphasized if you can't shoot planes inside of a 1km range. a. Ships with this type of layout did need a buff to their protection, but in some cases, such as the X Salem, it creates a rather monstrous AA platform. i. I think that AA guns firing inside of their normal range should have a decrease in efficiency of some type. 10) Short-range AA defenses now include guns up to 30 mm. This change will combine weak medium-range AA defenses with short-range AA defenses, strengthening the latter and removing the zone where the effectiveness of anti-aircraft guns was low. This will affect ships such as, for example, the cruisers Atlanta, Pensacola, Dallas and battleships Colorado and Arizona. a. This is a welcomed change to ships in general and I feel it balances them a bit better against Aircraft. BIGS’ SUGGESTIONS: 1) At Tier 4…there is currently no team play tools available for the carrier player to use to assist an allied surface ship. I would STRONGLY recommend that each T4 bomber squadron gain access to the escort fighter consumable but when they are called into action (activated) they only call in a wave size of 2x fighters. Again, this will allow carriers at T4 a way to protect their allies (which is currently not possible at all) and to get new players a chance to learn the mechanic without A) being absolutely punished by it, and B) not knowing what it does until higher tiers. 2) When a plane squadron is recalled early, all planes that have not dropped their payloads should take normal anti-aircraft damage when climbing to "safe" altitude on their way to proceed back to the carrier. If a plane has attacked (dropped their payload) and breaks off to return back to the carrier, these planes should receive the 30% AA resistance that aircraft get while attacking surface ships (when their attack run reticle turns green). I feel this would reward players for using their planes to attack as much as possible, while punishing those that are attempting to spam the recall action, aka "F Spam".
  20. l1nv5

    My turn to whine.

    Amidst this current chaos of CV-Rework, some of us are looking back at the days where CVs are non-existence and ask ourselves a question, why are we all suffering like this?
  21. It's been barely a week, yet with the amount that the CV rework has been discussed, it feels much longer. A common theme in many threads is how the game is bleeding players and how many people abstain from it. Others suggest a more patient path of giving WG some time to see the outcome of the rework, based on the reasoning that game balance will normalize in time and stop being in a state of flux. A question however remains. Provided WG is able to complete and present a satisfactory product that conforms to the aims they themselves set when starting with the rework, how long would you be willing to wait? While there is no guarantee that the final product will be necessarily good, in the end the playerbase is the lifeblood of the game so it should at least be acceptable by the majority. In this case and for the sake of simplicity time will be measured in monthly patches since this is where most of the changes will be located. Personally one part of me is pretty impatient and pessimistic. Another however wants to give WG some more time to develop their product and see where it goes from there. Looking forward to your opinions and a civil discussion .
  22. I feel that at this point, it's too early for a verdict on the CV rework - the majority of carrier players are still learning to play with their new planes. While playing my Mahan and Aigle, numerous dive bombers or torpedo bombers attempted to attack me, which is just dumb. In the few instances where carriers were smart enough to actually use rocket planes, they missed about half of their attack runs because they attacked me from the bow or stern. That being said, in a couple of days, when new CV captains discover the "F" key, and the importance of not changing course in the middle of an attack run, I expect the lives of DD captains are going to get even more difficult than it is now. However, I feel it is early enough for me to come to a conclusion about the new sector AA system, and I have to say, it is an improvement. I'm not talking about the new flak mechanics/"balance" changes to AA bubbles , in fact I dislike the new flak, as it feels too inconsistent. This post is solely focused on the advantages of sector AA over the old system. IMO, the worst thing about the old point-and-click AA system is that there's zero skill involved. Any 8 year old can ctrl-click on the aircraft squadron. The skill ceiling for point-and-click AA is the exact same as the skill floor. And after you click on the squad and activate your Def AA, there's literally nothing else you can do to increase the efficiency of your AA. Sure, you can turn into torpedo bombers to mitigate damage, but that's not killing planes. Why is this a problem, you might ask? In the old AA system, a 40% winrate potato with an AA build will shoot down more planes than a 70% unicum not using an AA build, over the course of a single attack run. Of course, over the course of the entire match, the unicum will most likely shoot down more planes, due to surviving longer into the match, and taking less damage from bombing runs. But the fact that skill has no effect on AA is still a problem for pre-rework CVs. Now, the AA mechanic still doesn't require significant amounts of skill. At first glance, there doesn't seem to be much to it besides selecting sector and turning the ship. But upon close examination, the new sector AA has a far higher skill ceiling than the old system. An experienced player who swaps the sector at exactly the right moment will inflict significantly higher damage than a novice who swaps 5 seconds too slowly. Swapping sectors at the right moment requires good prediction skills, situational awareness, as well as lots of experience. There's also a risk-reward gamble at play; exposing your broadside to the incoming planes will make it more difficult for the squad to fly into your low-priority sector and thus increase your AA damage, but it will also make you more vulnerable to AP shells from ships, torpedo attacks and rockets from aircraft. Does the increase in AA efficiency justify putting your ship in a vulnerable position? The answer depends on a wide range of variables, such as the strength of AA, turning radius of the ship, speed and distance of aircraft etc. In time, clever carrier captains will be able to bait battleships into prioritizes one sector, then flying into the low-priority sector before the player can change priority. This would punish inexperienced players while skilled players would be less severely affected. Of course, Captain skills and ship modules still has a large impact on effectiveness of AA as it rightfully should, but now the player's skill level actually has a meaningful impact. Tl;Dr The new priority sector AA mechanic raises the skill ceiling of AA considerably, and rewards experienced players who take the time to learn the new sector.
  23. I'm sure I'll take some grief for this, But I'm really liking the rework. I've had better games in the last 2 days, than I've had in months. There's more action and actual TEAM WORK, just yesterday I watched and ad hock battle group form up in chat 2 uptiered BB's and 2 AA Cruisers! they crushed all that stood in there way let me tell you. Concealment Expert is no longer a must have thus freeing up 4 captain points on BB builds. The CV's don't insta-delete you anymore, I actually dodged torps and shot down 9 planes in a Musashi! I'm not saying that it doesn't need tweaks, DD's need to be buffed a bit, and the AA needs some work, the sector AA thing is ridiculous. I'm sorry for those of you rage quitting, but if you give it a chance you might find that you really enjoy the new challenges, I know that I am.
  24. Unlike a few other people on the forum I've seen so far, I'm enjoying the new CV gameplay...sort of...ok not really. I will say that I like the new controls. Being able to control a squadron and conduct attack runs is fun and much more interesting than previous CV gameplay. But that's where the good things end, from here its down hill. For starters, I wish that the controls where a little bit more free. Instead of only being able to control the planes left and right, I'd like to also be able to control the pitch of the planes. Something akin to the mouse controls of games like World of Warplanes or War Thunder (yes I said the word, you can kill me later) would be really cool to have for cv gameplay. That way theres a bit more margin for error when beginning an attack run, as you'd have more control on where you drop your ordinance rather than controlling it on one axis only. Second, CVs need to pack more of a punch. I recently played a game in the Ranger where I spent about half of the game trying to kill one Queen Elizebeth. I scored 5 bomb, 3 torp, and 15 rocket hits for about 45K damage, plus another 5 fires for 7K damage. Yet...the damn thing wouldn't die, which cost me the match. CV's can not carry teams, let alone get kills. I've only killed about 10 ships with the new CVs, all of which I had to kill steal because planes do so little damage. Rockets, while fired in large volleys, have basically no chance of fire. Bombs have a ridiculous chance of setting fires, yet so little actually land on target that this fact is basically negated. And torps, what the hell happened to the chance of flooding? I've had matches where I scored 10 torp hits yet only one flood. Plus they do pitiful damage compared to surface ships, they don't have the rate and saturation of fire. Sure the ranger's torps have about the same max damage as one AP shell from a Baltimore, but since you can only drop two torps at a time compared to a Baltimore's 9 shells, the torps will do significantly less damage. And thats not even taking into account A. the time it takes to swing your planes around for another run vs. the reload time of artillery, B. if the torps score a high or low damage roll, C. the torpedo damage reduction of anything other than a DD, and D. if your planes live long enough to make another run or be shot down by AA. Also, I think part of the problem with low damage turn outs, and this is pure speculation just fyi, but I think theres a bug with the damage control for bots in coop. I've noticed that they seem to be able to put out fires really quickly even after I set one less than 30 seconds ago. Third, AA is scary. The rework to the AA mechanic is interesting, like being able to focus AA power on one side of your ship to increase its affivness. However, there is a problem with this. Say two ships are sailing more or less down the middle of the map side by side, and the ship to port has its AA focus to port while the ship to starboard has its AA focused on its side. Affectively, they have become a no fly zone, completely immune to planes. Not sure how you overlooked that in testing but ok, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt WG. Although, I have to ask, what in the name of all that is holly happened to balance? I was in a match in my Ranger and I sent some bombers after an Akizuki with an AA rating of 46. The entire squadron was wiped out before I could start an attack run...by one Akizuki. Um, what? An entire squad of planes wiped out in less than 5 seconds, not exaggerating, by one Japanese DD. I'm sorry, I must have missed the memo that hell has frozen over. Not to mention, I was in a match in my Akizuki and I couldn't shoot down one catapult fighter for more than 3 minuets. Did you guys do something to the bot AI in coop? They seem considerably stronger now, like 'I'm losing matches more than usual' stronger. Anyway, I digress, if an Akizuki can destroy an entire squad no problem, just imagine what would happen if I sent them against, oh I don't know, ANYTHING OTHER THAN A DD? Lastly, this is more of a nitpick but I thought I should bring mention to this, did you hire caption obvious to make your UI. I can tell when my planes are being fired at by AA, I don't need an icon telling me that. Perhaps that icon can go off when I'm attacking a ship that has its AA focused to one side and Im in that zone, but I don't need be told that I'm being fired at when i can see the tracers and explosions around my planes, it's redundant. Next thing I know I need to be told that the sky is blue, human nature is strange, and EA is an evil company. To sum up this borderline essay of a feedback review, I think you're on the right track for fun CV gameplay, but I can't help but feel that it's more in of a beta state than fit for actual release. Its a start, but damn you need to buff CVs. I'm actually glad I used my free xp from the Hiryu to get the Fredric instead of the Shokaku.
  25. Obviously, air scouting is an integral part of naval warfare, but it's currently detrimental to ships that rely on being discreet. Radar is being changed so only the radar ship can directly see the detected ship, at least for the first few moments of detection, while the rest of the team is merely alerted to the detected ship's location on the map. I think that would work well for air detection as well. Planes can already put a pretty good beatdown on most ships, so I don't think a Yamato should also be able to dev strike a light cruiser or destroyer from across the map that is only spotted by a ww2 multirole fighter. Planes could still alert the team to enemy movement, spoiling the plans of any would be surprise bettsux backdoor torpedo boting. Perhaps it could be a combo of marking air detected ships on the map, as well as reducing their surface detectability by 2-5km while spotted by the plane. Just an idea.
×