Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
paradat

CV Rework - Full Co-Op Game

21 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

1,150
[WOLF1]
[WOLF1]
Beta Testers
6,488 posts
9,585 battles

Flamu just posted this:

Looks interesting, can't wait to try it out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,150
[WOLF1]
[WOLF1]
Beta Testers
6,488 posts
9,585 battles

Hmm I wonder if those fighters are flying cap for the CV?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
319
[SYJ]
[SYJ]
Members
918 posts
2,119 battles

Couple things I saw:

(Realizes there's no bullet points on mobile)

Dang

 

- The player was able to abort the attack after he committed on a cruiser that got destroyed

- He didnt use a lot of the fighter consumables, but there was an abundance of fighters. Could catapult fighters now be 3 plane squadrons? Or is there always ai fighters?

- looks like squadrons are tailored to counter specific classes (rockets are anti dd, but to bomb them would be useless

- rip bomb dispersion

 

Overall looks fun

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14
[GAMMA]
[GAMMA]
Beta Testers
51 posts
7,090 battles

Wonder if the Saipan will still get tier 9 planes for extra survivabilty against AA, but with smaller squadrons (except for the huge DB squad). And the Kaga / Enterprise will get the tier 6 / 7 planes?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
475
[MAHAN]
Beta Testers
1,400 posts
5,111 battles
29 minutes ago, _1204_ said:

- rip bomb dispersion

Flamu seemed to miss this, but something was impacting the circle in that awful dispersion attack. I wonder if that is defensive fire, or if the player was being punished for committing to the dive and then trying to correct too much. If you watch it closely the dive bombing ridicule doesn't narrow in like it did on earlier attacks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
181
[LLMF]
Alpha Tester
1,243 posts
1 minute ago, AdmiralPiett said:

Flamu seemed to miss this, but something was impacting the circle in that awful dispersion attack. I wonder if that is defensive fire, or if the player was being punished for committing to the dive and then trying to correct too much. If you watch it closely the dive bombing ridicule doesn't narrow in like it did on earlier attacks.

Defensive fire active on the defending ship?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
491
[NWNG]
[NWNG]
Members
2,041 posts
3,580 battles

hmm

Rockets for destroyers
Bombs for Cruisers
Torpedoes for Battleships/Carrier

That seems to be how the carrier can counter each ship type

This also seems to be more fun to play. Once all the aircraft are done, you return to the CV and choose the next squadron, and back into action pretty much instantly.

I like how once an attack run starts, AA ignores the other aircraft not making the run.

The Dive Bombers, are wrong.They should not have to climb first, before starting their dive; they should already be at altitude, ready to dive.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,869
[NGA]
Alpha Tester
9,718 posts
3,941 battles

I'm really liking what I'm seeing. Being able to affect dispersion like that should work considering it's unlimited planes. Just hope they start modeling the rockets on the fighters where they're supposed to be mounted and not so obnoxiously far forward.

 

All aboard the hype train errr... boat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,150
[WOLF1]
[WOLF1]
Beta Testers
6,488 posts
9,585 battles
2 hours ago, J30_Reinhardt said:

I'm really liking what I'm seeing. Being able to affect dispersion like that should work considering it's unlimited planes. Just hope they start modeling the rockets on the fighters where they're supposed to be mounted and not so obnoxiously far forward.

 

All aboard the hype train errr... boat.

Yeah looking good so far.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
612 posts
4,907 battles
3 hours ago, AdmiralPiett said:

Flamu seemed to miss this, but something was impacting the circle in that awful dispersion attack. I wonder if that is defensive fire, or if the player was being punished for committing to the dive and then trying to correct too much. If you watch it closely the dive bombing ridicule doesn't narrow in like it did on earlier attacks.

I think it was the player was correcting to much. I actually really like that idea it will make the setup very important. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
859
[CMFRT]
[CMFRT]
Members
2,578 posts

Hard to tell how effective the AA is here. 

"If this was a real Midway, it would have killed the entire team by now"... hyperbole much?  :Smile_smile:

"This is less disjointed from the rest of gameplay than the old RTS".   Not really. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
251
[NUWES]
Members
1,677 posts
5,611 battles
1 hour ago, KilljoyCutter said:

Hard to tell how effective the AA is here. 

 

 

 

The AA wasn't very. The player is attacking Shimas, Zaos and Fusos (one might have been an Amagi). None of them are known for fearsome AA under the best circumstances and they are bots so I suspect none of them are specced for it either. It would be interesting to see this video again with  Midway planes against Gearings, Worcesters and Montanas specced for AA so we can see the other end of the spectrum. Given the CVs replenish planes now and they can't run out I suspect that good AA + DF will shred incoming strike groups since it really just inflicts a time penalty on the CV. Even in this video you can see later that one of the Zaos had DF on and it and a second Zao in the area were doing healthy damage to the strike groups. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
1,307 posts
6,557 battles
1 hour ago, KilljoyCutter said:

Hard to tell how effective the AA is here. 

"If this was a real Midway, it would have killed the entire team by now"... hyperbole much?  :Smile_smile:

"This is less disjointed from the rest of gameplay than the old RTS".   Not really. 

 

 

AA values will probably be adjusted, but I do like that it appears to be fairly random bursts.  That prevents highly skilled players from trololol'ing by long range AA.  On the other hand it might be a tad too random.

And while it is a slight exaggeration, I the point is very valid.  A current Midway vs a lineup of t6-10 bots without an opposing carrier would likely be able to kill two ships per cycle.  The fact an unopposed CV came down to the wire for the fight shows a vast decrease in game carry potential.  Judging by the dev's comments about multiple CVs a match and possible restriction of limits, I think their eventual goal is to make CVs equal to the other classes in carry potential.

It is still disjointed, but I think for the average player, playing a CV will still feel more like a WWII naval battle than it does currently, at least visually.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
314
[-WPG-]
Members
824 posts
3,401 battles

As someone who has never played carriers, I will probably play the new version from time to time. 

But not if they keep that annoying, incessant beeping in the game though. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
859
[CMFRT]
[CMFRT]
Members
2,578 posts
1 hour ago, Kenjister said:

AA values will probably be adjusted, but I do like that it appears to be fairly random bursts.  That prevents highly skilled players from trololol'ing by long range AA.  On the other hand it might be a tad too random.

And while it is a slight exaggeration, I the point is very valid.  A current Midway vs a lineup of t6-10 bots without an opposing carrier would likely be able to kill two ships per cycle.  The fact an unopposed CV came down to the wire for the fight shows a vast decrease in game carry potential.  Judging by the dev's comments about multiple CVs a match and possible restriction of limits, I think their eventual goal is to make CVs equal to the other classes in carry potential.

It is still disjointed, but I think for the average player, playing a CV will still feel more like a WWII naval battle than it does currently, at least visually.

"Without an opposing carrier" is the part that is left unsaid in the video -- I was thinking of the current setup where there is an opposing carrier and its fighters out there.

OK, so "left unchallenged, a current Midway likely would have killed several ships by now" would be a fair statement.

But left unchallenged, so would my Hindenberg.  

 

Edited by KilljoyCutter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,869
[NGA]
Alpha Tester
9,718 posts
3,941 battles
6 minutes ago, DouglasMacAwful said:

But not if they keep that annoying, incessant beeping in the game though. 

You mean the pings whenever you score a hit? There was one message that the original player got that Flamu reacted to. I'm not hearing anything remotely 'incessant' or constant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
857
[SBS]
Members
2,490 posts
2,253 battles

-Is it me or does it look pretty easy.  There really doesn't look like anything is particularly difficult to fly, AA didn't seem to overwhelming and the potential of DOT looks to be about what I expected (it didn't really look like the player was trying very hard to stack DOT).

-I have been concerned about DDs being easy targets and it looks like they could be.  The first attack run on the DD, the CV player totally let that DD off the hook and targeted another ship on the final attack run.  Also, no one was focus firing the spotted DD, if they had the DD would have been dead real quick.

-I'll have to watch again because I still can't figure out the fighter consumable.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
297
[KNTI2]
Members
787 posts
4,315 battles
17 minutes ago, Slimeball91 said:

-Is it me or does it look pretty easy.  There really doesn't look like anything is particularly difficult to fly, AA didn't seem to overwhelming and the potential of DOT looks to be about what I expected (it didn't really look like the player was trying very hard to stack DOT).

-I have been concerned about DDs being easy targets and it looks like they could be.  The first attack run on the DD, the CV player totally let that DD off the hook and targeted another ship on the final attack run.  Also, no one was focus firing the spotted DD, if they had the DD would have been dead real quick.

-I'll have to watch again because I still can't figure out the fighter consumable.

 

By nature this rework has to lower the skill floor. They'll probably fix it by introducing def AA fire to DDs as compensation, so that even if the CV doesn't lose planes, their drops will tend to miss (with all consumable considerations in play of course).

> spotting

This is inherent to carrier play. The only way to make this not hurt DDs as badly is a hard cap of 1 CV per side, so that the CV can only focus on one area at a time. I really hope that, if nothing else, they accept that, because otherwise it's going to be terrible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,071
[ABDA]
Beta Testers
16,193 posts
11,707 battles
1 hour ago, Slimeball91 said:

-Is it me or does it look pretty easy.  There really doesn't look like anything is particularly difficult to fly, AA didn't seem to overwhelming and the potential of DOT looks to be about what I expected (it didn't really look like the player was trying very hard to stack DOT).

-I have been concerned about DDs being easy targets and it looks like they could be.  The first attack run on the DD, the CV player totally let that DD off the hook and targeted another ship on the final attack run.  Also, no one was focus firing the spotted DD, if they had the DD would have been dead real quick.

-I'll have to watch again because I still can't figure out the fighter consumable.

 

It was a co-op game.  You can't expect too much from the targets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
859
[CMFRT]
[CMFRT]
Members
2,578 posts
1 hour ago, NATOMarksman said:

By nature this rework has to lower the skill floor. They'll probably fix it by introducing def AA fire to DDs as compensation, so that even if the CV doesn't lose planes, their drops will tend to miss (with all consumable considerations in play of course).

> spotting

This is inherent to carrier play. The only way to make this not hurt DDs as badly is a hard cap of 1 CV per side, so that the CV can only focus on one area at a time. I really hope that, if nothing else, they accept that, because otherwise it's going to be terrible.

WG has said part of this change is to get more carriers in battles, including IIRC multiple carriers per side -- so still multiple squadrons per battle, plus from the videos perhaps near-constant presence with little cooldown.   

So what amounts to telling players who like the current interface "too bad, screw you" won't even accomplish one of the big things the CV-haters say they want, which is less spotting.

 

 

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.

×