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

Liking CV Revamp

23 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Members
1,866 posts

After considering it, I think the arcade action will be more fun than the current 2D plotting. You have to be like an octopus now. The skill floor seems to be more accessible in this version. You will do damage and not get wiped by an uber CV driver. Frankly I don't find the current version to be that hard to do OK in but I'm not going to compete with somebody really dedicated. As it is, in a 2 carrier game, W/L depends very heavily on the CVs. The one really weird part is that Saipan, Enterprise, GZ and Kaga will have little relation to what they were intended to be when sold.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
502 posts
62 battles

I agree that I am looking forward to the new version.

GZ, Kaga, Saipan... well are all OP. So WG will be happy to redo them. They only need to offer compensation to the old owners in case they want to return them. I have all three but almost never play them. I will be curious about the new versions and tend to keep all three 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,449
[-Y-]
Alpha Tester
4,771 posts
6,944 battles

The skill floor will be lower, for sure, but then so will the skill ceiling.

players risk getting bored.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,940
[ARGSY]
Members
6,226 posts
4,202 battles

It's the being-an-octopus that turned me off carrier play. I free XP'd to the Langley purely to try it (and because my son begged me to), and found I sort of don't mind it at that level of play, but only barely. Even with watching and rewatching Farazelleth's beginner guides, I can srt of cope in co-op but not randoms. Taking away the multitasking will make carriers a lot more accessible. Every drop will be a manual drop, sure, but the unicum multitasking gods won't be able to pull off several across the map in rapid succession all the time.

Share this post


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

I'm interested to see that if I know game mechanics, will a cv main or someone that has played aircraft games/simulators with wsad be better off?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
90
[-BSS-]
Members
394 posts
6,197 battles

It looks way to easy to hit in the videos I saw, almost turning cv into a permanent dot style damage, it didn’t seem possible to miss with even minimal effort / skill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
599 posts

I  would like to thank our Developer Overlords for their most outstanding triumph. 

However a thread without a bunch of complaints is simply not heard of.

Why do we have to suffer through one more day of Sky Cancer?

Put up a bunch of Goodyear Blimps until you are ready!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
839
[SBS]
Members
2,449 posts
2,253 battles
57 minutes ago, Visidious said:

It looks way to easy to hit in the videos I saw, almost turning cv into a permanent dot style damage, it didn’t seem possible to miss with even minimal effort / skill

I agree.  The technical skills involved looks really simple.  That isn't any different than the rest of the game.  The hard part of playing multi player games is playing against the other players skill.  In the rework you are barely playing against other players in the sense that all they can do to directly counter your attack is to try to steer out of the way.  The AA you face isn't player skill, and most ships are pretty limited on how well they can avoid a CV drop.  The missing component is directly facing off against other players skill.  That what multi players games are all about, you build up your skills to face against your skill opponent.  WG is specially trying to remove from CV vs CV play and I understand why.  Still, CVs will always feel detached from the game if surface ship players don't directly engage with CVs; and CVs don't have to directly face other skilled opponents, be it a surface ship and/or another CV. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
470
[NWNG]
[NWNG]
Members
2,019 posts
3,491 battles
3 hours ago, Seadog_Supreme said:

After considering it, I think the arcade action will be more fun than the current 2D plotting. You have to be like an octopus now. The skill floor seems to be more accessible in this version. You will do damage and not get wiped by an uber CV driver. Frankly I don't find the current version to be that hard to do OK in but I'm not going to compete with somebody really dedicated. As it is, in a 2 carrier game, W/L depends very heavily on the CVs. The one really weird part is that Saipan, Enterprise, GZ and Kaga will have little relation to what they were intended to be when sold.

Yeah, WG is going to have to find some other way to keep people happy with those ships. Enterprise should have September 1945 AA loadout. 8 5"/38 cannons, 54 40mm Bofors, and 32 20mm Oerlikons... no one would want to go near that thing with aircraft, with that kind of AA firepower...:cap_haloween:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
84
[WOLF1]
[WOLF1]
Beta Testers
1,111 posts
11,932 battles
3 hours ago, lron_Dog_of_Jutland said:

 

GZ, Kaga, Saipan...<snip> I will be curious about the new versions and tend to keep all three 

I'm a Jimmie Johnson fan  so I have to keep Saipan regardless...LOL

916726804-auto-feb-10-monster-energy-nas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
273
[HCH]
[HCH]
Beta Testers
875 posts
7,230 battles

Things I'd like:

  1. Being able to have more than three planes go on an attack run. So it's ok for BBs and DDs to have massive alpha strike potential, but carriers can't? Before, it takes massive skill from the CV player, massive mistakes from the target player, or a combination of both for a ship to get deleted by a CV in one go. The easiest method is to stack AP bombers and drop on a Gneisenau, and even then it can be difficult if the Gnies player is half way decent and knows how to dodge dive bombers.
  2. Tiny Tims for USN rocket attack planes, because nothing like 11.45" anti-shipping rockets to make destroyers regret their life decisions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
84
[WOLF1]
[WOLF1]
Beta Testers
1,111 posts
11,932 battles

...But actually I do like the rework and think it is a healthy change for the game.  Unfortunate that it will put some folks out who are heavily invested in the RTS style but it just wasn't working out for the vast majority of players.  The perspective is far more cinematic obviously and has a great look to it which has the potential to draw more players to the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
470
[NWNG]
[NWNG]
Members
2,019 posts
3,491 battles
26 minutes ago, Slimeball91 said:

I agree.  The technical skills involved looks really simple.  That isn't any different than the rest of the game.  The hard part of playing multi player games is playing against the other players skill.  In the rework you are barely playing against other players in the sense that all they can do to directly counter your attack is to try to steer out of the way.  The AA you face isn't player skill, and most ships are pretty limited on how well they can avoid a CV drop.  The missing component is directly facing off against other players skill.  That what multi players games are all about, you build up your skills to face against your skill opponent.  WG is specially trying to remove from CV vs CV play and I understand why.  Still, CVs will always feel detached from the game if surface ship players don't directly engage with CVs; and CVs don't have to directly face other skilled opponents, be it a surface ship and/or another CV. 

Even firing main battery guns, the only thing your opponent can do, is try to dodge incoming shells. So dodging is already a skill everyone needs... To hit an opponent, means predicting your opponent's actions. Their turns, speed changes, etc. So when it comes to CV in the new rework, you have to predict their turns, and speed changes as well. And a ship only being able to dodge aircraft strikes... well, they only have to dodge incoming main battery fire... Where's the difference that you speak of?

A Ship's AA against CV, is like a Ship's Secondary against surface ships. At least, that is what it looks like with the videos we have right now of the rework.

One thing that I think needs to happen: If a ship has dual-purpose Main battery mounts, they should be able to switch between Anti-Air mode, and Anti-Surface Mode. As it stands, Dual-purpose Main battery guns, perform both tasks simultaneously. If simultaneous attacks, remain, switch which mode, simply switches which mode is controlled by AI, and which is in player control.

Or, if Dual-purpose main batteries can only perform 1 task at a time, a player would then have to choose, which is the bigger threat, the incoming aircraft, or the enemy ship. And boom, we have similar play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,732 posts
9,857 battles

The rework is the single largest loss of rewarding skilled play in the history of the game.  I'm not even a CV players and this is a travesty.  I was interested in grinding them, pretty much have Lexington unlocked, but no way now.  I had held off grinding them thinking they were going to fix the notoriously bad UI, fix the lagging, the spotting issues and in general clean it up.  WG didnt even give it a shot because they had known balance issues from day one, and steadfastly refused to permit any of the super unicum CV gods to assist in the process since they obviously understood the issues better.

So apparently all you do is strike.  Being effective boils down to who can strike more efficiently with a large side of who had the better RNG.  Sounds real dynamic.  So much thought on the player's behalf.  I've watched two videos of the rework and am bored already.  This is what I waited for?

The loss of your ability to defend team mates is ridiculous.  Same for your ability to control areas of the map.  AI controlled fighters? 

There has to be more.  I cant imagine how upset people like Fem and Fara feel about this.  Players like them spent hundreds of hours mastering and perfecting their craft.  I'd feel sick, like I got stabbed in the gut.  This is WG basically saying to these guys you are too good so we are going to rip apart everything you guys figured out and dumb things down to levels where a monkey can play it.

If this is it I'm filing for a refund on the premium CVs I've bought preparing for the grinds.  I will be thinking hard about new premium purchases.  If they are going to do this over the skill gap in CV play, DDs are next.  We already see rants near daily about the DD player skill gap. 

 

  • Cool 2
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
839
[SBS]
Members
2,449 posts
2,253 battles
Just now, Counter_Gambit said:

Even firing main battery guns, the only thing your opponent can do, is try to dodge incoming shells. So dodging is already a skill everyone needs... To hit an opponent, means predicting your opponent's actions. Their turns, speed changes, etc. So when it comes to CV in the new rework, you have to predict their turns, and speed changes as well. And a ship only being able to dodge aircraft strikes... well, they only have to dodge incoming main battery fire... Where's the difference that you speak of?

The difference is aircraft speed and maneuverability greatly outperforms any ship in the game.  There is little skill involved in putting your plane in an advantageous position to do damage to your opponent.  Pretty much the only counter play for the surface ships is steering out of the way.  On a strategic level there really isn't any thing else you do.  Sure you could group up with AA ships but that is not how the game is played now.  If the game turns into one where you always move in AA groups it will be a radical departure from what we have now. 

To sum it up, there is very little strategic play involved in playing CVs or playing against them.  Nothing like the cat and mouse game of DD vs DD, or DD vs radar.  Look at all the strategic positioning that takes place to keep CLs safe from getting blapped by BBs, and BBs to avoid walls of skill.  You have none of that with CV play in the rework because you so greatly out pace and out maneuver everyone else you just fly around looking for your next victim.  Nothing strategic in that.

8 minutes ago, Counter_Gambit said:

One thing that I think needs to happen: If a ship has dual-purpose Main battery mounts, they should be able to switch between Anti-Air mode, and Anti-Surface Mode. As it stands, Dual-purpose Main battery guns, perform both tasks simultaneously. If simultaneous attacks, remain, switch which mode, simply switches which mode is controlled by AI, and which is in player control.

I agree that would give surface ships more direct control over counter play against CVs.  Two problems with that.  One, most people are here to play a surface combat game.  Two, surface ships already have their hands full dealing with other surface ships.  I don't know if they need another task to manually control.  If surface combat happened at a significantly slower pace than it currently does then manual control of AA (and sub hunting) would be a great addition. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
180
[SIDE]
Members
730 posts
3,250 battles
4 hours ago, lron_Dog_of_Jutland said:

I agree that I am looking forward to the new version.

GZ, Kaga, Saipan... well are all OP. So WG will be happy to redo them. They only need to offer compensation to the old owners in case they want to return them. I have all three but almost never play them. I will be curious about the new versions and tend to keep all three 

I am guessing they will offer the same exact thing when when they pulled Belfast / Kutuzov from the market. They will offer a refund in doubloons, and then any one who did take it is extremely sad and wishing their next super container will have that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,691
Members
18,173 posts
5,190 battles
8 hours ago, LoveBote said:

The skill floor will be lower, for sure, but then so will the skill ceiling.

players risk getting bored.

Good thing there's 3 other ship types to play....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
243
[NUWES]
Members
1,651 posts
5,536 battles
8 hours ago, Merlox said:

I am guessing they will offer the same exact thing when when they pulled Belfast / Kutuzov from the market. They will offer a refund in doubloons, and then any one who did take it is extremely sad and wishing their next super container will have that.

I believe they pretty much said that is what they will do. I doubt I'll turn my Enterprise or Kaga in. I'm a collector so they will stay unless they are truly horrible, and possibly even then. Saipan is debatable. If she isn't that good I'll turn her in for doubloons in a heartbeat. There is nothing really significant about her. I don't own GZ. If I did I probably would not turn her in either. She didn't actually perform any  service but it was built and it is an interesting ship. 

One of the things I really want to see is how they will differentiate same-tier, same-nation carriers from each other than by different national plane types. For example, how is Ranger going to be different from Saipan, or Hiryu from Kaga, or Enterprise from Lexington. Airgroup size and compositions were one of the  biggest factors along with plane types. IN the new model it doesn't look like there is any difference between airgroup sizes or compositions. Right now we haven't seen anything about that. Although part of that has to do with the fact that we have only seen Midway in action. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
101
[EQRN]
Members
340 posts
8,880 battles

I would have preferred a minimal effort attempt at fixing the rts mode before jumping into the current rework.  A loiter component to force planes to pretty much beeline for an expected target and not sit for what seems like an eternity spotting most of the map.  Getting rid of strafe seems like a popular suggestion, how about removing fighter v fighter altogether and make them attack like TBs but to knock out light/medium AA (not using rockets, ffs).  Running out of planes happens less since only ships deplete planes (or loiter period expires and planes splash into water out of fuel).  I do feel bad for the the skilled cv players, though, and expect many/most to leave the game, but if they've never played a DD in a CV match with the crap CV player on their side, they can never know the frustration everyone else's feels with CVs right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,730
[INTEL]
Members
8,567 posts
25,643 battles
17 hours ago, FrodoFraggin said:

  I do feel bad for the the skilled cv players, though, and expect many/most to leave the game,

I dont feel bad for them at all. They've spoiled so many matches for so many players over the last three years, ruining game after game, especially for new players who might have stuck with the game but met CVs and quit because there is absolutely nothing worthwhile about "interacting" with a CV. They also ruin the game because so many players went right into CV play instead of learning the game first -- WG never put thresholds or restrictions in place, resulting in 00s of poor CV players ruining the game for their own team. Good riddance to CVs.

Unfortunately the update simply turns CVs into artillery from WOT, which isn't going to help at all.

Nothing about CVs will be resolved til they get their own mode with its own rewards and operations/ship capabilities. CVs cannot be reconciled to a surface  warfare arcade game. 

  • Cool 1
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
434
[-GPS-]
Members
2,536 posts
24,981 battles
1 hour ago, FrodoFraggin said:

I would have preferred a minimal effort attempt at fixing the rts mode before jumping into the current rework.  A loiter component to force planes to pretty much beeline for an expected target and not sit for what seems like an eternity spotting most of the map.  Getting rid of strafe seems like a popular suggestion, how about removing fighter v fighter altogether and make them attack like TBs but to knock out light/medium AA (not using rockets, ffs).  Running out of planes happens less since only ships deplete planes (or loiter period expires and planes splash into water out of fuel).  I do feel bad for the the skilled cv players, though, and expect many/most to leave the game, but if they've never played a DD in a CV match with the crap CV player on their side, they can never know the frustration everyone else's feels with CVs right now.

I do wonder if WG is ditching RTS so that WoWs can be played on phones/consoles/whatever. 

I really like the RTS player in a FPS game concept. Besides current play is somewhat like driving a carrier for real. The new thing is just planes shooting ships. 

Farazelleth made a couple of very constructive videos about how to improve the current RTS CV play. WG obviously isn’t interested. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,228
[PVE]
Members
5,595 posts
18,173 battles

I expect the change to drive away many current CV players and attract some new ones who like playing from the plane's perspective. Once the novelty of playing planes in WoWS wears off, the population of carrier players will probably remain unchanged. It is a ridiculous change and personally I could care less what happens with them but I just have to laugh at all the effort they are putting into this new play style. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16
[IXM]
Members
55 posts
917 battles
On 9/22/2018 at 12:07 PM, Destroyer_KuroshioKai said:

The rework is the single largest loss of rewarding skilled play in the history of the game.  I'm not even a CV players and this is a travesty.  I was interested in grinding them, pretty much have Lexington unlocked, but no way now.  I had held off grinding them thinking they were going to fix the notoriously bad UI, fix the lagging, the spotting issues and in general clean it up.  WG didnt even give it a shot because they had known balance issues from day one, and steadfastly refused to permit any of the super unicum CV gods to assist in the process since they obviously understood the issues better.

So apparently all you do is strike.  Being effective boils down to who can strike more efficiently with a large side of who had the better RNG.  Sounds real dynamic.  So much thought on the player's behalf.  I've watched two videos of the rework and am bored already.  This is what I waited for?

The loss of your ability to defend team mates is ridiculous.  Same for your ability to control areas of the map.  AI controlled fighters? 

There has to be more.  I cant imagine how upset people like Fem and Fara feel about this.  Players like them spent hundreds of hours mastering and perfecting their craft.  I'd feel sick, like I got stabbed in the gut.  This is WG basically saying to these guys you are too good so we are going to rip apart everything you guys figured out and dumb things down to levels where a monkey can play it.

If this is it I'm filing for a refund on the premium CVs I've bought preparing for the grinds.  I will be thinking hard about new premium purchases.  If they are going to do this over the skill gap in CV play, DDs are next.  We already see rants near daily about the DD player skill gap. 

 

Welcome to what WG does best. You liked the game before and were good at it? We're going to make sure you're not rewarded for that in the future. They did the same thing in WoT. This is why I've spent nothing on this game but enjoy it for what it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×