Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
MrDeaf

Should WG delay new lines to fix balance issues?

11 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

4,053
[SYN]
Members
16,027 posts
12,803 battles

So, apparently, WG does not have the resources to go back and fix broken ships at the same time as adding more ships.

 

How does the community feel about pushing back new ships to address current issues?

Edited by MrDeaf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
533 posts
10,674 battles

So, apparently, WG does not have the resources to go back and fix broken ships at the same time as adding more ships.

 

How does the community feel about pushing back new ships to address current issues?

 

It's something that, in the case of carriers, should have been done months ago.  I know people are clamoring for the Royal Navy BBs (which, to be fair, should have be introduced months if not years ahead of any Russian ship in the game, Russian devs or no) and that pushing them back would be a... let's say bold move from a PR standpoint, but that's a small price to pay to get a hurry-up-now fix to a serious design problem that has lingered for as-near-as-darnit two years now with very little attention (beyond occasionally, and hilariously, making things worse somehow).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
846
[LOU1]
Members
4,372 posts
15,290 battles

I notice there are no "neutral" options.  In my case, I am trying to learn the dynamics of the game as it stands.  I am finally getting a feel for the viewpoint of the developers and an understanding of their development path.  Would gladly select the "Continue to adjust the game based on the Big Data while still listening to the small data from the forums" option.

 

EDIT: In terms of carriers, I have mine set aside until something improves with them.

Edited by ExploratorOne

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,053
[SYN]
Members
16,027 posts
12,803 battles

I notice there are no "neutral" options.  In my case, I am trying to learn the dynamics of the game as it stands.  I am finally getting a feel for the viewpoint of the developers and an understanding of their development path.  Would gladly select the "Continue to adjust the game based on the Big Data while still listening to the small data from the forums" option.

 

EDIT: In terms of carriers, I have mine set aside until something improves with them.

 

okay, I added "other" as an option.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,242
[NDA]
Beta Testers
5,251 posts
8,905 battles

re-work AA entirely and carrier's.    re-work strafe or remove it entirely.   have def fire be a USN only consumable (excluding carriers )  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,848
Members
5,597 posts
7,121 battles

I'd say the majority have been complaining about CVs for as long as I remember. Imo, I don't really see them doing a great deal other than adding new premiums.

 

I would've rather they just left them alone until they had a better plan on where to go with them. It can't be easy. I haven't seen many suggestions that I feel are the right fit, so I can imagine what WG is feeling.

 

Overall, I'm just happy peeps hate is focused on CVs and not DDs anymore. I don't think they can take any more nerfs.

Edited by Wulfgarn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
592
[DHO-2]
Beta Testers
1,257 posts
12,078 battles

This is [edited].

 

The whole balance thing should have been sorted out in the planning phase.

 

IMHO, WG has no planning phase.  Throw it to the community, and majority vote wins.  TY Ru Server.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
5,281 posts
12,191 battles

Look, just because of the riot act, they need British BB's to come out. After that, they can delay UK CV's and any other premium, especially CV's because CV's have had issues since ALPHA AND BETA that have been unresolved.

 

- Manual drop needs to be removed, give us a spread option or something but it has to go, as it's existence is WHY AA has been buffed to it's current state. 

- Strafe needs to be AoE debuff only of grouped bombers, maybe fighters, not an auto delete - 0 justification.

-Hopefully dialing back AA as is dials back DF consumable a little

- IJN fighters need to be brought up to a competitive level with USN for the sake of gamebalance and history

-USN needs better options to take into battle that afford cover and striking power

- both previous things mean overhauling both lines loadout sets to be even in fighter group numbers (example, AS has 3 fighters, mix has 2, strike has 1, regardless of IJN or USN)

- Because DB's are USN's "thing" they should have their dispersion reduced to allow more hits, to up damage and further define their flavour against IJN torps

- torps, globally need a slight nerf, CV's though do kinda need it that little bit more.

- Damage of planes per tier needs to be adjusted so inter tier fights are not decided out right and that DFE skill makes it a fairer fight.

-DFE needs to lose the ammo buff

-Emergency Takeoff needs to have the time penalty significantly lowered or removed - as is, especially USN, either the fire is quicker dealt with with Flags, modernization, and the skill that reduces fire and flood time, or your under constant fire that your dead by the time planes get back up. Tends to happen when planes spot you and BB's open up or cruisers from half a map away. 

- Evasive Maneuvers needs the speed penalty gone or just be removed because the penalty makes it do more harm than good.

-Spotting ranges on aircraft need to be put back to pre 6.5? nuumbers, whatever they were before last patch so that planes are not spotted 2 freaking grid squares away. 

-BFT needs to return to being a 2 point skill that offers 10% boost to AA, not 20,as it used to be.

- I can't remember but if I'm remembering right that expert tail gunner was moved to tier 2, it needs a serious buff or moved back to tier 1, if it is the tier 1 skill still ignore this one

- Bombers, especially those with forward firing weapons, need to be better able to defend themselves against enemy fighters.

-The Modernization's for secondary range and AA need to be recombined into one module again - it makes sense especially for DP guns and with AA at a reasonable level, it's a concession that could help CV's that maybe opt forit (unlikely but possible) but is fair to the other classes as well.

 

Maybe one or two things I've missed, it's 9:30 and i'm kinda tired. But this is fixes that should have happened before release and have been ignored too long. And I generally think these are fair because it concedes some of what makes CV's OP vs other ships and helps them while also allowing CV's to have a better chance against those ships. Because both sides need to make concessions for CV's to be balanced, be it the inter ships, or both nations lines players. They do need some new content, sure, and it's foolish to have if that's the case, the guys that do new content and the guys looking to do patches/balance tweaks tied up as one group in my opinion, but this is a reckoning long over due. We need CV's in a state new players can access them without the skill gap being insane because of strafe and manual drop, or AA, they need to be able to withstand losses and not rendered useless especially just because they are out tiered, They need to not basically be decided by nation and set up, but they need to also not be able to put 4-12 torps 1km away where dodging is almost impossible unless the CV player makes a mistake, and lets be honest, those that abuse drops the most do often enough to rarely if ever make one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,114
[FOXEH]
Banned
14,364 posts
23,364 battles

Look, just because of the riot act, they need British BB's to come out. After that, they can delay UK CV's and any other premium, especially CV's because CV's have had issues since ALPHA AND BETA that have been unresolved.

 

- Manual drop needs to be removed, give us a spread option or something but it has to go, as it's existence is WHY AA has been buffed to it's current state.

- Strafe needs to be AoE debuff only of grouped bombers, maybe fighters, not an auto delete - 0 justification.

-Hopefully dialing back AA as is dials back DF consumable a little

- IJN fighters need to be brought up to a competitive level with USN for the sake of gamebalance and history

-USN needs better options to take into battle that afford cover and striking power

- both previous things mean overhauling both lines loadout sets to be even in fighter group numbers (example, AS has 3 fighters, mix has 2, strike has 1, regardless of IJN or USN)

- Because DB's are USN's "thing" they should have their dispersion reduced to allow more hits, to up damage and further define their flavour against IJN torps

- torps, globally need a slight nerf, CV's though do kinda need it that little bit more.

- Damage of planes per tier needs to be adjusted so inter tier fights are not decided out right and that DFE skill makes it a fairer fight.

-DFE needs to lose the ammo buff

-Emergency Takeoff needs to have the time penalty significantly lowered or removed - as is, especially USN, either the fire is quicker dealt with with Flags, modernization, and the skill that reduces fire and flood time, or your under constant fire that your dead by the time planes get back up. Tends to happen when planes spot you and BB's open up or cruisers from half a map away.

- Evasive Maneuvers needs the speed penalty gone or just be removed because the penalty makes it do more harm than good.

-Spotting ranges on aircraft need to be put back to pre 6.5? nuumbers, whatever they were before last patch so that planes are not spotted 2 freaking grid squares away.

-BFT needs to return to being a 2 point skill that offers 10% boost to AA, not 20,as it used to be.

- I can't remember but if I'm remembering right that expert tail gunner was moved to tier 2, it needs a serious buff or moved back to tier 1, if it is the tier 1 skill still ignore this one

- Bombers, especially those with forward firing weapons, need to be better able to defend themselves against enemy fighters.

-The Modernization's for secondary range and AA need to be recombined into one module again - it makes sense especially for DP guns and with AA at a reasonable level, it's a concession that could help CV's that maybe opt forit (unlikely but possible) but is fair to the other classes as well.

 

Maybe one or two things I've missed, it's 9:30 and i'm kinda tired. But this is fixes that should have happened before release and have been ignored too long. And I generally think these are fair because it concedes some of what makes CV's OP vs other ships and helps them while also allowing CV's to have a better chance against those ships. Because both sides need to make concessions for CV's to be balanced, be it the inter ships, or both nations lines players. They do need some new content, sure, and it's foolish to have if that's the case, the guys that do new content and the guys looking to do patches/balance tweaks tied up as one group in my opinion, but this is a reckoning long over due. We need CV's in a state new players can access them without the skill gap being insane because of strafe and manual drop, or AA, they need to be able to withstand losses and not rendered useless especially just because they are out tiered, They need to not basically be decided by nation and set up, but they need to also not be able to put 4-12 torps 1km away where dodging is almost impossible unless the CV player makes a mistake, and lets be honest, those that abuse drops the most do often enough to rarely if ever make one.

 

This is totally correct, CV's have been screwed up since the original BB whining started in CBT.

1. Agree / manual drop needs to be totally removed, it is the one mechanic which has always been broken and OP.

2. Agree / Strafe needs to be fixed, or removed.

3. Wait and See / Ships need to be able to defend, CV's need to be able to strike.

4. Agree / Fighters should be balanced. (USN VS IJN)

5. Agree / and could not agree more, as USN now has a "help me or help the team" choice every match.

6. Agree

7. Disagree / DB strikes are totally competitive now.

8. Agree / but just for drops, the minimum distance needs to be increased to mimic IJN torp detection ranges.

9. No Opinion / not a carrier driver

10. No Opinion / not a carrier driver

11. Disagree / Emergency Takeoff is bogus and should be removed.

12. Agree

13. Disagree / planes are visible forever, and can be heard even further.

14. Agree with it being a tier 2 skill, Disagree with the 10% over the 20%.

15. Disagree / half the tier 1 skills are carrier exclusive right now.

16. Agree / give them their historic values

17. Agree / All secondary weapons on a CV should be dual purpose.

CV's have been the red-headed step-children of WoW since CBT and that needs to be addressed. Balance them between themselves (USN VS IJN),

and balance them in the game so their strikes aren't op and their ships are survivable.

 

 

Edited by Umikami

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
221 posts
5,213 battles

THE SECRET TO BAD AND IMPROPER BALANCING HAS BEEN UNCOVERED! **This is a pure opinion and highly contentious but the attitudes line up perfectly with this theory!**

For as long as World of Warships has been in existence, it has been obvious from the start which nations the dev's like and dislike, here is my conjecture as to why WoWS will always be broken. They have a love fest for all GB (OP ships of all classes and levels)... They hate Japan, hate the French and love themselves too much, aka Russia/Soviet Union. So lets look back through the looking glass shall we? Russia lost to JAPAN in the Russo - Japanese War of 1905... Who designed the majority of Russia's fleet? FRANCE!!! Who designed the majority of Japanese fleet? GREAT BRITAIN!

So.... Now does it make sense why the balance is messed up? They are putting century old bias' into the game. The only reason the US does not get butchered badly is due to mutual respect. They were allies in WW2 and the Cold War was a stale mate. So Russian ships are marginally better than US but not by much and US gets radar which Russian's don't

In their minds at Wargaming, had Czar Nicholas not been CHEAP during the naval build up of the late 19th century than RUSSIA would have CRUSHED and OBLITERATED JAPAN! Had Korea to themselves, Japan would have been weak and crying... Russia wold have had Manchuria with ease... The Russian's LOVE Alternate History unless they speak of Peter and Catherine the Great. Reality of it all has been and will be is: Russia is a paper Tiger. Had it not been for Lend Lease, no way Russia would have been able to build over 134,000 T-34 tanks. They would have had to devote more industry and materials to trucks, clothes and food stuffs hence they would not have been able to out produce Germany on the Eastern Front.

Just take a look at history and how Russia has always portrayed their history and their current attitudes and it makes sense guys and gals... History is a great reflection of the present if looked at with the appropriate caution and care.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,601 posts
7,524 battles

I am sure some or many ships have minute problems its the CV's which in my opinion have the worse problem(s) - New ships add revenue but by any token the CV if it is to become more popular and user friendly they need to put some resources into that. The CV may or should have a complete make over instead of a piecemeal patch here and there and see if it flies...and it hasn't got any accolades if I detect that right.

I was thinking...brace yourself....CV's should be the first ship model to use Multi monitor support.  If you had two monitors you could have the over head MAP and unlimited zoom to please your level of detail.

On the other can be the Battle monitor where you can see the planes them selves in 3rd person mode and actually take over that squadron to attack manual style.  if not then the squads attack in programmed mode but not as efficient.  A little side angle to that would be is to train your pilots so that each leader is not the cookie cutter ACE of the Pacific for each and every squad.   yeah it could become complicated but lets have it both ways..some may go with full programmed and some would want real hands on control.  But whichever make the CV game controls easier than what it is.   I'm thinking..were their any games in the past

which had controls that were easier and thought out than WOW's CV??    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×