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
    • Surveys
  • General WoWS Discussion
    • General Game Discussion
    • Team Play
    • Support
    • Discussions about Warships
    • Historical Discussions and Studies
    • Player Modifications
  • Support
  • 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
  • Support

Calendars

  • World of Warships Event Calendar

Found 17 results

  1. Granted CVs are a dying class in the upper tiers and I have been more then vocal advocate for change in the class. After a recent game in the US DM, I can not express my frustration to way people despise the current balance of CV to surface game interaction. Here are the carnage in the pics. Man after this game I hope that Midway driver took a shower sheesh. Again I am not mad at the guy, he did what ever WOWS allows him to do. Wiping out close to 42k in one pass is not only brutal but I think unrealistic even for arcade standards of WOWS. But here is my evidence to the Developers to get a kick laugh at untill the CV rework is done. Later everyone EDIT* We lost the game.
  2. To all my frustrated CV drivers, all I can say is until more information comes out I can only give these worlds of what is to come from the Summit in St. Petersburg. However I do not have a time frame as to WHEN, but You guys that are CV main can decide "Getting to see the new @WorldofWarships aircraft carrier prototype was awesome. Getting to test it out was an honor."
  3. I would like to propose a petition being drawn up so WG can see we as a community, want to see the cv get its re-work or at least see some drastic changes on test servers so we can at least start working on the problems. Lets get a lot of names on here and get it done, I love this game but cv needs work.
  4. Carrier re-work propose

    Hello,some people know me as hyena in this game, i play sinse the closed, I love (and sometimes hate) this game, and love carriers, i know sometimes is frustrating play versus and with carriers, sadily still is the most unbalanced class (in my opinion), the balance in carriers flow over updates making or “op” or “useless”, at point we dont even see any news about new lines So, i wanna give some sugestions for make a better balance. First some problems with this class gameplay: - Extreme unbalance in between ijn and usn line. - Hard gameplay - Hard learning curve - The skill gap influence excessive a match (makes too easy or too hard to a good/bad player do something) - Strafe is too strong in the hands of a good player. - Loadouts totaly unbalance the lines between nations. - Too much groups vs too less groups. - AP bombs are extreme good or extreme trash, its gonna depend a lot from the MM give you some targers to use it. - Long reload time in high tiers. - Bad secondaries in high tiers. - Slow comands. So, that is what i think the “biggest” problens today between lines, so, my sugestions: Change the squad number and planes per/squad. As fun and interessing is have diferent loadouts, its not works for balance, the carriers need alread balance the planes status, the dmg from bombs torpedos, the hp, the ship, the hangar, a LOT stuff, what i propose is... keep the louadout the same for all carriers. Thats going start a good base for all lines for all new nations without mess a lot with the balance in that part. Lets say: Sugestions for loadouts: Tier – Fighter – Torpedo bomber – Drop bomber : planes in group T4 1-1-1 : 4 planes in group T5 1-1-2 : 4 planes in group T6 2-1-2 : 5 planes in group T7/8 2-2-2 : 5 planes in group T9/X 2-2-2 : 6 planes in group [I know some ijn cv playes will hate me but i think less groups is better for introduce more people to play this game as a carrier (easy to play for everone!)] “ok but thats looks boring, same loadout for everone what the point for diferent lines?” I’m happy you ask random comander! Then the “national flavor” comes in! Lets say, usn have more strong fighters? So, the usn can get +1 fighters in his groups with more HP and DMG but slower. “but hyena, thats not going make the ijn fighter useless again?” Then what we know from common sense from ijn fighters? They are fast, great manouver but weak. So make the ijn fighters a bit weaker but faster, so can play as “hit and run”! yay tatics! When you start making +2+3 planes difference on group you start making they “overpowed” versus other group. This big gap is even bigger when player know what he doing, reduce that difference, make some strong and some weak points and let players start learn for play with that points to get an advantage, not start giving the house in the hands of the player, give the wood for he make a good house or a terrible one. The same logic can apply to all groups (fighters, torpedo bombers, bombers), some planes can be stronger, some faster, some carry better bombs, some carry better torpedos, some with a better detection, etc etc etc. You can mess a lot with that for make interessing and diferent gameplay without mess with the base, so ever new line the new player only need learn the weak and strong point for his planes (like a bb need learn his main guns). 2. Upgrade the groups, not everthing at same time. The player need be able to choise what he want in a group for each group of planes. I’m talking about be able for exemple take 1 torpedo bomber with AP and one with HE. This gonna make cvs more dynamic and interessing. Exemple of upgrade: 3. Learning curve: Play –right- with carriers is HARD, make something like that: The tier 4-5 the player need learn how-to-atack (give the manual drop back!). The tier 6 the player need learn how-to-use his fighters better (strafe!) The tier 7-8 how-to-make crossdrops. 4. The Strafe problem Strafe is a powerfull mechanic for cvs make more impact in the game BUT in the hands of a good player its become one OP mechanic for totaly stop the other cv for playing, thats NOT good for the game, its NOT good become totaly useless because one player. Today a good player can only strafe, strafe, strafe again, and kill all the enemy planes without lost or need more reload the planes, thats not cool (well, it is for the good player, but its not cool to everone else). I propose 2 solutions for this problem: A. Reduce the strafe power. – Its okay, but still the ‘strafe strafe strafe’ problem. B. Make the strafe powerfull BUT a “high risk” use, i mean, make the strafe use at least 50% of fighter ammo, thats going reduce the “strafe everthing” and the gap between 2 players. You still can strafe and kill one plane (great reward!) group but you go put in risk your fighters (less ammo), and if you miss its going have a huge impact (free enemy group for make dmg or kill your fighters), so you going need use more carefull 5. AP bombs and deep torpedos Deep torpedos are useless, for real, if not hit dds are useless, for a carrier impact the game and have a high chances to win he/she need learn to kill dds, if you wanna make deep torpedos interessing you going need give some kind of advantage, like, deep torpedos? The planes going be stronger and the torpedos going have a high chance to flood. Ap bombs, is... well... sometimes is fun, sometimes is useless, need be something more in between this both, like less dmg but maybe make a flood if overpen the ship? Today they are “over” good vs some targer but useless vs the major part of ships 6. RNG in drop bombers Thats. Just. Terrible. It is, its terrible depends a lot from RNG in your bombs, its not like the torpedos, you atack you know you going make some dmg, but the bombs is something like “oh look, you make a lot dmg, or you dont make nothing”. Carriers need time to time to atack and its frustating drop and not hit any bomb, or hit and make... 3k dmg... wow... such useless! Make the minimum dmg higher and maybe the higher dmg less. 7. Drops. The national flavor cam come to make another interessing thing, diferent ways of drops. Like that: 8. Lose all planes. Thats terrible to any cv, stay without planes is like a bb lose all his guns. And can only show the “over” domination from a unicum cv over a potato one. One interessing ideia, make a consumable like “call for more planes” and recive some new groups from out of map to keep in fight! Maybe? I dont really think its need that but its an interessing ideia. 9. Slow commands problem. Sometimes planes is slow for make some commands, like get out when the enemy strafe out with a fighter (and strafe you with another fighter). Make it faster! 10. Also, the commands. You alread try press “shift” to select the groups and press 1 to 9 in your keyboard? Its... distant. Maybe space bar is better? Also, the “alt” for manual atack, maybe use “F” is better. Just a sugestion, need test here, i use a extra button on my mouse for manual atack, but thats not the case to everone. 11. Spot everthing. As fun and good it is be able to perma-spot everthing on the game, its bad to overal and your tean become over dependent from the carrier informations. Maybe you can make the cv only spot for the player himself (like in cyclone), one icon in ships to show if they is spoted for the team, and add a button to inform the location of some ship is team comands (thats one interessing interaction of carrier and team). Also keep the torpedos from dd spoted only if the plane is from some distant from they (lets say 3km?) i think thats going make the life of dds a bit better in matches with carriers and you going need choise keep the torpedo spoted (giving a better chance to your tean not get hit but give a chance for the dd run) or the dd (giving a chance to your tean kill him but get hit by his torpedos). 12. Carriers need more AA for less snipe. Snipe in early game totaly kill the balance in the match, thats need go out. The AA consumable is ok for high tiers, but the sealclub is strong in the mid-tiers, give a more chance to this new-players play. 13. Make less alpha and more DoT dmg. BB(ys) love cry about be "nuked" in a cv (what supose happpens...), well, you can make carriers more focus in DoT (dmg over time, high chances of flood and fire) so reduce a bit that useless fell they have. I think for now thats everthing. Sorry if some words not right, i’m not english native, and sorry for the long text, here a potato for make you happy:
  5. I think a few ideas could potentially be adapted from EVE Online game play specifically, from EVE's carriers and command ships, which have been very successful for carrier gameplay historically in that game. 1 - Keep the RTS game-style. 2 - Remove "Manual" drop/strafe from all nations/planes (hear me out). 3 - In the load-out screen, add multiple styles of each plane type for additional customization (fighters, dive bombers, torpedo bombers--models could even be brought in from World of Planes). These type differences would each possess a unique ability and must be selected at the loadout screen before a match, only able to possess one style of each plane type. 4 - To replace the manual and strafe mechanics give each plane type a unique ability or two with a long CD. If you click the target the plane will dogfight, the dive bombers/torpedo bombers will drop; however, if you use your unique ability for that plane they will do perform a unique action for that plane or type of plane. Potential examples (only one of each plane style could be preselected for each match in the loadout screen): Dive Bombers: - High Altitude Bombers: Have these bombers have a smaller field of vision and slightly lower health by default. Using the special ability allows bombers to "fly at high altitude" (make them invulnerable for X seconds). During high altitude, their range of vision would increase dramatically, while only able to loiter. This helps the destroyer scouting issue. - Radar Bombers: Because removing manual drop eliminates the ability to drop on smoke, Radar Bombers would be able to identify where a ship in smoke is and focus it's drop pattern (like a Kaga drop pattern). This would not grant vision to the entire team. - Etc. Torpedo Bombers: - Formation Torpedo Bombers: Torpedo Bombers use a unique torpedo spread on a long cooldown in the fight. - Long Drop Torpedo Bombers: Torpedo range is greatly extended for a short time. (This helps carrier's avoid AA but gives the enemy more time to maneuver). - Etc. Fighters: - High Speed Fighters: Using unique ability greatly increases fighter speed for ~20 seconds and requires a very long cooldown, ~2-3 minutes. - Barrage Fighters: This unique ability is functionally the same as strafe, imposing a long cooldown on that ability. - Etc. 5 - Finally, you could give the CV "Command Ship Bonuses" to the friendly team within a specific range tactically (think of carrier bonuses during the Halloween event). Examples (just a few): - Minus 4% dispersion for X seconds. - Increased concealment for X seconds - Increased spotting for X seconds - Fire prevention added to friendly's for X Seconds (looking at you English) - Increased AA defense for X Seconds - Etc. In Summary: Keeping long time CV's happy: - Keep the RTS gameplay. - More plane options and more loadout options I.E. More customization. Lowering the skill threshold for new players: - Remove all Manual drops and strafes. - Add one or two "unique" abilities to planes. - Better Team play. Other: In-game name: Rikan
  6. CVs need work, we all need know this and many ideas have been floated on how to do it. Some good and some bad. Below are some of the best I think. Carrier Captain skills. Carrier planes Health. Fighter Strafe. Alt-attacks Thanks for reading and I'm looking forward to a discussion. (I put everything in spoilers because block quoting annoys me, sorry for the inconvenience.)
  7. Tear Of The Players reworked

    Here we go I guess this is from dev blogs since I picked this pic some someone who shared it in reddit discord Imagine new TotD in epicenter mode oops that one is edited for lol so I put genuine one below.
  8. Fara is one of the top CV players on the EU server, and has done an extensive guide on playing CVs. Always high quality thoughts from him on CV topics, as well as competitive meta. While this video is quite long, it gives a lot of insight into the possible outcomes of the announced USN CV changes and the effects of the CV DamaCon change.
  9. I don't care if my bombers get wiped immediately if I'm flying into 3 ships stacking AA neither do i care if my bombers die right after they're done dropping or that USN ships are AA speced but to have this kind of still in randoms is just unacceptable as well as the Iowa literally killing bombers before the bombers themselves can drop.
  10. I've been trauling through the forum and I've come upon a lot of reworks, so I figured I should give my two cents. In the current state of CV play, CVs are an emotional roller coaster full of ridiculous highs and game breaking lows, as is, this class is the lowest played and most skill based line in the entire game. I intend for these proposals to reduce complexity in gameplay, and to fix the imbalance between the two nation's CVs. My first proposal is to simply reduce squadron size to the US CVs to 5, as well as loosening their drops and giving them more flexible loadouts. This will also allow for more progression among the American CVs, allowing them to keep pace with the IJN line. Dive bombers for both nations should get the IJN manual drop for dive bombers. Add a captain skill that reduces the effectiveness of higher tier AA. Manual drops should not have a point of no return, but should give ships more visual queues that a drop is going to occur. Adding a tutorial for CVs. Remove exit strafing, the previous meta was very fluid, and encouraged more dodging and counter-strafes. Please tell me what you guys think of these ideas and give me feedback!
  11. Reworking Damage Control

    Just batting around ideas related to the Damage Control Party consumable. It's so simple that it might even be detrimental, in its current state. So here's an idea I've tossed around off and on since CBT: Convert Damage Control to an internal reload multi-use system and standardize it across all ship types, balanced by the available crews as well as a much shorter cooldown for each crew based on ship class. Hitting R in this case dispatches one of your crews to address one issue, which can simply be auto-assigned on priority (Flooding > Fire > Engine > Rudder > Guns > Launchers) or else determined by a brief "fix this!" wheel that pops up when you hold R down (not strictly necessary though). One party resolves one problem, then goes on cooldown. Based on turret reloads, though, only that one damage control party actually goes down. You still have the other ones available per your ship's size category. Examples, though keep in mind numbers are merely theoretical... -- Destroyers -- 2 crews -- 45 second reload -- Cruisers -- 3 crews -- 55 second reload -- Carriers -- 3 crews -- 65 second reload -- Battleships -- 4 crews -- 65 second reload Each crew has its own reload time, much like a gun turret. So you hit DC, a crew solves one problem and goes on cooldown, but you still have additional crews to commit. So if you have 2 fires, a flood, and a damaged gun turret, it will take a total of 4 uses to repair all of it. Per above, the crews should prioritize the flooding and fires as these are, naturally, the most immediate dangers to the ship's survival. One thing I considered is-- If you wind up blowing all your DC teams before one of them is off cooldown, their respective cooldowns increase-- call it 'overworking the crew' or something. It'd punish people who just spam their R key in combat while rewarding more strategic/attentive players with shorter cooldowns on their Repair function when they only use it as needed. - Destroyers are still on a relatively short cooldown, but also have the fewest crews they can commit to damage control, as the ship itself has a relatively small compliment. - Cruisers have more crews but a somewhat longer cooldown. - Carriers have as many crews as crusiers, but a longer cooldown to represent fewer available hands taking care of a bigger ship. It's something of a weird balance position for carriers, admittedly. - Battleships have the most crews, as their crew complements are much higher than destroyers or cruisers. However, their cooldowns are also longer for each crew to be "ready" again. You'll notice that CVs have a longer internal cooldown compared to BBs. This is intentional, and can also be adjusted for balancing, but I feel that the CV is more delicate and so their men have more work to do to get the ship combat-ready again. What does this do? - It's a more believable approach to damage control. Rather than "magically" fixing all problems with a single button and then waiting a minute and change to do it again. - This also introduces strategy into repair assignments. Do you fix everything at once and suffer a longer refresh on your parties, or can you afford to do it piecemeal? - This also creates more "levers" that WG can use to create national flavor. For example: USN ships may have an additional damage control team compared to other countries, and/or a shorter reload timer, reflective of their heavy focus on damage control training. IJN ships might have an increased timer from average, by contrast. - A little more complexity isn't a bad thing. It keeps the game interesting. Thoughts?
  12. Alright come what flak may for this, but I feel battleships are the damage pinatas in this game and unless someone is sailing broadside on, they are stuck with overpenetrations and mediocre damage roles 0-8k dmg every 20 to 30 seconds if we get lucky. I've had good games in battleships and know that they are capable of carrying provided the circumstances are right. However, those circumstances exist when the other side is not using HE. Too many times will my clanmates and I be stuck with overpens when people are kiting away or even sailing straight towards. While they other ships are firing HE doing 4k each salvo every 1- seconds plus fires, we get stuck with overpens and low damage roles. Guns that have the capability to do 10k damage with one shell instead do 1020 dmg or miss and do nothing. I just had a North Carolina fire 3 full salvos into my Hindenburg at ranges from 10k to 3k. He did a total of 10k damage. I killed him at full health. At some level, there's a tier and skill difference, but I should've died from showing broadsides to him. Instead, I lived. Now, here are some proposals to level out the field to make battleships more flexible and durable. A cruiser player can spam HE damage and correct his aim better than a battleship player. So either make battleship AP more dangerous* or more accurate*. Less over pens and more hits = more reliable damage. Also, whats this bull about penetrating shells that do no damage? I know it happens, I've seen it happen, it needs to stop. Fires out the wazoo, because again HE spam from other ships. Make battleship repair and damage control more effective than what it is. Less reload time* and more health added. Or add more heals. Also, my clanmate just suggested this. Nerf fire damage. His point was that a destroyer can typically survive more easily than a battleship when lit on fire. We will be testing this within the week in a training room to get hard data instead of observations. End suggestions. I really feel that these battleship shells would do more damage than making a hull look like swiss cheese in the game vs real life. In actual combat, those shells are going through all sorts of cables and piping doing all sorts of damage. In some cases, live rounds are still inside and crew must extract the round from the ship before it goes off. All these little nuances are boiled down to an overpen that does little or no damage. As arcadey as this game tries to be, if that's the feel its going for it needs to be balanced. *indicates things that would like to be seen most. Keep replies civil and constructive.
  13. I don’t claim to be a carrier expert nor a carrier main. Out of all the classes on World of Warships, I play carriers the least, 13%. I do have a 50-65% win rate when I play CVs (except for the Essex because I just unlocked her and I’m still trying to figure her out). I haven’t seen a lot of information regarding the proposed carrier re-work but last time I heard they were still open to suggestions so I figured I’d at my own and see what you guys think of it as well. Please Read all the suggestions before commenting. Make Co-op more rewarding for Carriers or allow manual drops in Co-op. I understand the reasoning behind taking away the manual drop. Seal clubbing (high skilled players purposely playing at lower tiers) was a major problem. Taking away manual drop was not the proper solution to the problem. All it did was make CVs even harder to play for people trying to learn them and seal clubbers just found different ships. Auto dropping is only recommended if you are going to die before your planes get to their target. It is easy to dodge with ships (played a T4 Hosho Co-op game and a South Carolina bot successfully evaded 2 auto torpedo drops). Manual dropping is a must in higher tier games and learning how to successfully drop them against ships that cannot fight back as hard is a good learning environment. To get back to the main issue of seal clubbing, Wargaming could change the rewards for aircraft carriers in Co-op. I played a stock Hosho game in Co-op with only the first win bonus as a multiplier. I got 758 Ship XP. To research the B-Hull is 3,050 XP. I would have to play a minimum of 35 co-op games to research the T5 Zuiho and that is still playing with stock planes. Then I would have to play more Co-op games to get the Ryujo (flat justice, ya happy RivertheRoyal?). Playing in Random battles will earn more experience but not being able to manual drop will make your only targets lazy battleships. (Thankfully you do get 2 torpedo squadrons in the Zuiho so cross dropping will achieve better results but only against large ships. Allowing players to manual drop in Co-op so that they have an easier time learning the proper torpedo arming range and lead for bombing destroyers is paramount. I have never heard of seal clubbing in co-op. (Even though bots are pretty stupid). A different fix would be to have auto dropping aircraft drop their torpedoes closer to the ship that way if you drop on a broadside target there is a guaranteed 1 torpedo hit for Japanese aircraft. (Auto dropping is significantly easier for US planes because they have 6 instead of 4 planes per squadron) Get rid of stock planes being a tier lower than the Carrier. This probably pisses me off the most. For a comparison, you just unlocked your new Colorado or Nagato. Oh boy, those 16in guns look good. Wait, what? I have to use the 14 in guns from the previous ship and upgrade the hull first before I can mount the 16 in guns? That’s what it feels like when you unlock a new carrier. There is a reason why my Essex is at a 38%-win rate, I don’t have Tier 9 planes with it and get matched against a Taiho often. Having lower tier planes in a new ship just kills any desire to progress up a ship line. They have already changed it so that some of the carriers already have same tier attack planes (Ranger, Independence, Bogue). Take the Essex for example, to get all Tier 9 planes I need 57.500 ship/free XP, my average per game is 1,377 XP (it should go up as I get better at the ship, but my average for my Lexington is 1601 XP). That’s a minimum of 36 excruciating games with the stock flight module before I am fighting against same tier airplanes. If they feel the need to research something other than hull upgrades and flight mods (if they get rid of lower tier stock planes) here are some suggestions. All same tier as aircraft carrier. Fighters- 7 knots faster (average speed increase is anywhere from 3-10 knots) but they have fewer hit points and carry 20% less ammo. Dive bombers- carry two bombs instead of one (so that they can do more damage to destroyers) that have less damage per bomb and less fire chance. Torpedo Bombers- torpedoes are 8 knots slower (so that torpedo booster commander skill does not negate it) but have an increased chance of flooding. (I don’t know the exact number but it does feel less than ship launched torpedoes). Normalize number of planes per squadron and squadrons per ship, per tier. Having 6 planes but fewer squadrons worked when the game first launched. Having 6 fighters in US aircraft squadrons was better because there was no strafing. Squadrons that had more fighters in them were more likely to win, this was countered by Japanese carriers having more squadrons. With strafing, all that mattered was how many squadrons you had and how just 1 squadron of fighters can make 2 or 3 squadrons of attack planes turn away. Normalizing the number of planes to 4 or 5 planes per squadron for all tech tree aircraft carriers will also make ships easier to balance and make premium ships more unique. Have a way to fully retrain a captain to a new ship without the cost of doubloons. Yes, this is a way for Wargaming to profit on their game by making a full retraining of a captain 500 doubloons. Having an untrained captain just makes learning a new carrier that much more painful. It was like how a new Destroyer captain was. You know, before knowing if you were detected (Situational Awareness) was free. This meant you didn’t know if you were spotted until shells from the entire enemy team were raining down on you. The most crucial commander skill for carriers is Air Supremacy (+1 fighter and bomber per squadron). There is no partial to this skill while retraining. If you’re a Japanese carrier that goes against a U.S. carrier, you’re going to have a bad time. The only work around is having Commander XP, which you can only get by having a 19-point captain. Which since playing this game since June 2015, I still do not have. (I have three 18 point commanders and four 15 point commanders, but this was mainly due to me retraining a new captain for a new ship until I realized it was better to take the penalty). Those are my suggestions. I have seen the suggestion of having fully customizable flight modules, but I wouldn’t want that. Having a balanced loadout, air supremacy, and strike loadout would be fine with me. I could see fully customized squads leading to just Torpedo Bombers and Fighters and people never using dive bombers because flooding is more effective than fires. Thoughts? Feel free to totally disagree with me if you’re a carrier main who thinks my ideas are crap. I don’t play them that often but these are just some of the things that frustrate me the most when I play them occasionally.
  14. This is a copy/paste of an article I just posted on the WoWs subreddit, so sorry for that, but I'm interested in getting some feedback form multiple communities. Here it is: Recently, there has been a very large amount of discussion on citadels and the impact they have on the game's meta. Battleships are often too afraid of taking large amounts of damage by showing their sides, so they have adopted a largely bow on play style that largely slows down gameplay. Similarly, cruisers are often written of as bad or mediocre solely on the ease with which their citadel can be penetrated leading to being outright sunk immediately or so severely damaged that they can't be aggressive without risking being sunk. Cruisers that don't suffer so severely from this problem are still played very cautiously to prevent taking heavy damage in short amounts of time. Some measures have been taken to increase aggressiveness of players, such as the release of German battleships that are very difficult to citadel, the economy re-balance, and to a lesser extent the upcoming removal of stealth firing ability and shuffling of firing ranges. Truthfully, in my opinion, nothing WG has changed recently has had any notable effect on passivity, in fact I'd say that some of their decisions have even gone as far as to encourage more passive play. I've pondered several ways to foster and encourage a more fluid playstyle amongst the playerbase, and while I can't offer any foolproof suggestions, I still would like to offer some suggestions, knowing full well the near impossibility of them ever being considered, let alone implemented. I must also admit that this has been inspired by a remark made by the now retired CC, Business6. My various ideas are as follows: Completely remove the citadel and completely rework how damage from heavy hits is calculated. This is probably the most drastic change that would require an overhaul of the entire game. It would also hinder part of the "national flavor" of German battleships, which wouldn't bother me personally because I'm not a big fan of the national flavor system when it leads to ludicrous mechanics and make whole lines overall weaker (i.e. RN CL acceleration, IJN and KM DDs). Simply lower the amount of damage a citadel does to a more reasonable amount. 20-30k salvos that can one shot a cruiser can be frustrating, but cut that amount down by 25 or 30 percent and, while still being a heavy hit, can still be less frustrating than instant death. Also increase the percentage of damage regular pens and non-pens can do to prevent meager gains from these hits. For example, in stead of a single Yamato shell dealing a full 14,800 damage from a citadel hit, a 30% decrease would lead to a 10,360 citadel hit, but regular pen and over-pen damage could be increased to keep it around its current amounts of 4,884 and 1,480 respectively. Overall, this would serve to decrease the disparity between regular damage and heavy damage, but could benefit the game in the long run. Change what effects that damage to the citadel has on the vessel. Citadels housed vital areas of the ship to include machinery and ammunition storage spaces. With that in mind, hits to these areas could serve to increase loading time on main battery and secondary guns without incapacitating the guns outright, or cause a speed or steering penalty without completely knocking them out. This could be a good opportunity to introduce new mechanics, consumables, upgrades, and even increase possibilities of "national flavors" that can be introduced. This is also very complex and would be very taxing to create the mechanics and model them on all the ships, but I would really like to see this implemented. As I said, these are all very rough ideas and are all in need of refining and critiquing, but I just wanted to go ahead and get it out there for whoever is interested. I don't mind if you guys want to comment with critiques, I'm well aware that they all have issues in one way or another, but I'd really like to know what everyone thinks. Thanks for reading!
  15. Keen Intuition ain't so bad!

    Most of us have already caught wind of the rumored captain skill tree rework, and if not, the original thread made on the topic is found here. If it's true, it needs a bit of polishing. If it's a hoax, my goodness I'd be very disappointed. It's a very well-done rework, yet doesn't change too much and I would like to see it implemented. The two skills I'm most interested in are 'On the Mark' and 'Keen Intuition', with the latter stirring up a storm. I've already read the initial reaction, but it really isn't it bad as thought to be. Perhaps it was misinterpreted, with the effects exaggerated to a level that I'm not tall enough to reach. 'On the mark' is mostly self-explanatory, showing how many ships are aimed at you. This is probably the lock-on effect, where your reticle moves with target ship. I would recommend taking this skill as a beginner/intermediate player, as it would help improve skill involved with proper angling and awareness. As an advanced player, you can kind of tell on your own by zooming in on possible candidates nearby and taking a peek at their turrets. If you're looking down their barrel and open to their shot, then you have an answer. Personally, I would skip this skill. 'Keen Intuition' has a vague explanation, and with that, an odd amount of slopes have suddenly become slippery. But this also means a wide variety of mechanics. Firstly, to make things clear, if you are the ship getting 'detected' by a user with Keen Intuition, you are not spotted. Second, if the player 'detecting' you decides to warn his team, well, we all know how cooperative teams can be. Trust me on that one, personal experience says a lot. Now, we have to remember that this skill is in competition with Concealment Expert. Smart decision, too. Longer-ranged stealth firing ships will continue to use CE, as well as anyone trying to be sneaky-and-cheeky. Though, you could just take both. To keep KI in line yet viable, I propose the following: -KI starts at a 4.5km 'detection' range starting at tier I -KI's 'detection' range will increase by 0.5km at each increasing tier (Ex. Tier I=4.5km, Tier II=5.0km, Tier III=5.5km ...Tier X=9.0km) -Minimap will only show direction of the nearest ship sailing (will not show ship type/tier) -Minimap will update every 15 seconds, and will switch if a closer ship is detected -Minimap will not show anything if no ships are in range -Similar to the 'last spotted mechanic' (perhaps a different color/outline) I highly recommend this skill for destroyers and cruisers, and personally, I would take this skill and CE if you can. Information wins battles, you know. With this skill, destroyers would be at an advantage contesting caps, able to tell if there is opposition and where its coming from, and may even be able to discern if there is more than one enemy. As a battleship, I find that upgrading your secondaries and AA are much more valuable, especially with Keen Intuition as a level 4 skill. And you can already tell when a destroyer is nearby and their direction through the built-in Situational Awareness as well as map awareness. If not, take the 'On the Mark' skill, as it shows when a ship is aiming at you.
  16. make cv's great again!

    first off, we all know cv's are broken and the main reason is : cv's arent actually played. yep,that's right,because cv's arent actually a playable class,because of 1 reason you cant actually control how much planes and how many squads launch on air wg didnt noticed that by making set planes by squad and set squads would make this class actually boring the real reason why i love playing cv's is that you need strategy and inteligence to win and by actually creating quantity of squads and quantity of planes by squad actually makes cv's a lot more enjoyable. and 2nd. cv's need a buff, not a very big buff but a commander buff,because while the 1 point hability can simply make AA's 10% more efficient actually for having a REAL buff on your planes you need 4 points, and only increases 5% more hp on planes and 10% on takeoff time. also, the 3 point hability is not very useful, rarely you will find a cv higher tier than you, i suggest that this hability should have a new one that buffs maybe.. bomb or torp damage
  17. We have been asking for ages, and WG still hasn't answered our pleas. that buggy UI gets old real fast, CV balance is a total farce, and AA is way out of wack. Do something, please WG! This aspect of the game is falling to pieces, and what do you do? You go work on fresh content.(?!) We can wait for new content. CVs need their promised rework. I honestly feel like I'll be married with kids before WG fixes this, in other words, a very long time. Really? Why does it seem like WG doesn't give a care about CV problems anymore? All they have given us are stopgaps that just make the problem worse! <sigh> WG, do you care about CVs? If so, could you give them their much-needed, much-earned rework? I'm tired of these constant delays for the rework. Just think it over, will you?
×