Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
Ace6steel

Should CV Manual options be removed?

CVs: Strafing and Manual Drops- Remove or keep them in place? (Pre-Rework)  

52 members have voted

  1. 1. Should Manual Drops and Strafing on T6+ CVs be removed?

    • Yes
      34
    • No
      18
    • IDK/I Don’t play CVs
      0
  2. 2. Should WG keep the old controls for CVs? Or keep going with adding new CV U.I?

    • Old Contols/U.I (RTS style)
      25
    • New Re-work U.I
      27

67 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

64
[SPTR]
Members
1,650 posts
2,269 battles

I wasn’t here in the beta and I had found out it was a petition that added this is the first place due to RNG of T7 fighters completely owning T8-9 fighters which should’ve had the advantage. I thank @Crokodone for providing me this information.

My opinion of the re-work: Un-needed and a waste of time. No offense to the WG devs I hold my respect for them

The main thing that had made a massive skill gap in the low CV population was people with the skill to use and abuse manual drops and strafing, the ability to de-plane a CV was so easy at low-tier WG fixed this problem halfway by taking the ability off T4 and 5 carriers. But being a T5 CV got a lot tougher because when you had a 4 CV game (2 CVs a side) and one of them was a T6 carrier, you could expect your planes to get completely wiped out. The solution to this wasn’t a massive re-work, it was removing the skill barrier. Those of you who didn’t like CVs because of the RTS style gameplay: There are three other ship classes to play if CVs aren’t your cup of tea. You literally can just play a ship that connects with your play style in this game, thats why many players keep certain ships because of how fun the ship is. This Re-work while not ready for release basically if used will wipe out any chance of us seeing any other historical CV classes, Ark Royal and Yorktown to name a few. The problem isn’t with the game, its the people un-willing to step out of their comfort zone and get used to something new. I personally enjoy the historical ability to command multiple squadrons at once. The new way CVs work: Takes the CV out of CV. I am not liking where this re-work is going so far.

WG please listen to what the community has to say, and I want to see a Yorktown ship that is playable in game.

I would Iike to know what many of you think

Edited by Ace6steel
  • Cool 1
  • Boring 1
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
64
[SPTR]
Members
1,650 posts
2,269 battles
3 minutes ago, RipNuN2 said:

Why would Yorktown and Ark Royal be precluded due to the rework? Premiums are a thing . . . 

But thats kind of the problem we are getting, you cant get the ship classes in the tech tree if they are reduced to premiums

not everyone has the ability to go out buying premiums left and right.

Plus the history of Premiums getting their uniqueness nerfed right out of them, or the premium getting removed altogether.

Edited by Ace6steel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,523
[HINON]
Members
9,317 posts
3 minutes ago, Ace6steel said:

But thats kind of the problem we are getting, you cant get the ship classes in the tech tree if they are reduced to premiums

not everyone has the ability to go out buying premiums left and right.

Plus the history of Premiums getting their uniqueness nerfed right out of them, or the premium getting removed altogether.

Not every ship will fit into the tech tree. The current premiums are not being removed and I'm sure they will still have some unique gimmicks we just don't know what they will be yet. The rework is far from complete and a lot of these details are still in flux. Perhaps they will even add a 2nd CV line at some point.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
64
[SPTR]
Members
1,650 posts
2,269 battles
3 minutes ago, RipNuN2 said:

Not every ship will fit into the tech tree. The current premiums are not being removed and I'm sure they will still have some unique gimmicks we just don't know what they will be yet. The rework is far from complete and a lot of these details are still in flux. Perhaps they will even add a 2nd CV line at some point.

Just commenting on the new controls for the squadrons:

I did not join a game that allows you to control massive ships, including aircraft carriers just to see one class where you are essentially playing WoWps (World of Warplanes). I personally don’t like the new controls

while the ability to accurately attack is nice, you lose the ability to move your ship at the same time which is kind of a give and take if you ask me

Edited by Ace6steel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
298
[SHOOT]
Beta Testers
1,887 posts
8,336 battles
1 minute ago, RipNuN2 said:

Not every ship will fit into the tech tree. The current premiums are not being removed and I'm sure they will still have some unique gimmicks we just don't know what they will be yet. The rework is far from complete and a lot of these details are still in flux. Perhaps they will even add a 2nd CV line at some point.

There are hints from the rework feedback page that it is nearing completion; thats the problem. WG is trying to thow in the towel while achieving nothing but the demolition of an otherwise mostly balanced and proven design. 

The only population restricting/vexing factors were:

1] unlimited ranged squadrons

2] buggy UI

3] total rng fighters.

4] ludacris APBombs.

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
64
[SPTR]
Members
1,650 posts
2,269 battles
Just now, Crokodone said:

There are hints from the rework feedback page that it is nearing completion; thats the problem. WG is trying to thow in the towel while achieving nothing but the demolition of an otherwise mostly balanced and proven design. 

The only population restricting/vexing factors were:

1] unlimited ranged squadrons

2] buggy UI

3] total rng fighters.

4] ludacris APBombs.

This basically

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,523
[HINON]
Members
9,317 posts
2 minutes ago, Ace6steel said:

Just commenting on the new controls for the squadrons:

I did not join a game that allows you to control massive ships, including aircraft carriers just to see one class where you are essentially playing WoWps (World of Warplanes). I personally don’t like the new controls

while the ability to accurately attack is nice, you lose the ability to move your ship at the same time which is kind of a give and take if you ask me

 

There has to be some give and take as CVs were way too influential, required way too much micromanaging, had way too much alpha strike, and were so vastly different in control schemes that it was much harder for players to pick up on leading to a scarce population.Personally I love the new scheme overall, needs a lot of polish to make it smoother but its more viseral and rewarding imo even though it will require a lot of relearning on my part.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Modder
1,106 posts
2 hours ago, Crokodone said:

mostly balanced and proven design. 

4Qc6iiG.jpg

They're none of those things at the moment.

Edited by zFireWyvern
  • Cool 3
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
64
[SPTR]
Members
1,650 posts
2,269 battles
6 minutes ago, RipNuN2 said:

 

There has to be some give and take as CVs were way too influential, required way too much micromanaging, had way too much alpha strike, and were so vastly different in control schemes that it was much harder for players to pick up on leading to a scarce population.Personally I love the new scheme overall, needs a lot of polish to make it smoother but its more viseral and rewarding imo even though it will require a lot of relearning on my part.

Not that I have anything against you nor do I take offense to your play style

the difference in play styles could’ve been reduced if players when first unlocking a carrier had a tutorial mission they could do to learn the basics of CV gameplay.

Micromanaging yes, influence depended on the skill of the captain, they could either carry all the influence or none at all

New scheme: one squad control, no control over ship while doing this= no historical accuracy (but then again does this game even have any?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45
[FYL]
Members
252 posts
1,406 battles

I think it might have been a bit better of a question to ask which you'd rather play. At this point WoW probably needs to stick with the rework based on making it for console and to hopefully get some return on that investment - and they may not get that from the console version. However, I won't play the reworked version much if at all

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
64
[SPTR]
Members
1,650 posts
2,269 battles
7 minutes ago, RipNuN2 said:

 

There has to be some give and take as CVs were way too influential, required way too much micromanaging, had way too much alpha strike, and were so vastly different in control schemes that it was much harder for players to pick up on leading to a scarce population.Personally I love the new scheme overall, needs a lot of polish to make it smoother but its more viseral and rewarding imo even though it will require a lot of relearning on my part.

But the alpha strike is historical as CVs could counter virtually everything

in this game CVs are countered by cruisers with no-fly-zone AA

if people can’t multi-task thats their fault

Tutorial missions could’ve helped acclimate the vast change in play style

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,405
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
16,231 posts
9,570 battles
9 minutes ago, Crokodone said:

WG is trying to thow in the towel while achieving nothing but the demolition of an otherwise mostly balanced and proven design. 

 

tenor.gif?itemid=8009273

2 minutes ago, Tanuvein said:

I think it might have been a bit better of a question to ask which you'd rather play. At this point WoW probably needs to stick with the rework based on making it for console and to hopefully get some return on that investment - and they may not get that from the console version. However, I won't play the reworked version much if at all

The console version has nothing to do with the PC game. This was decided because CV's were an unrepairable train wreck.

 

  • Cool 1
  • Bad 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,150
[WOLF3]
[WOLF3]
Members
16,846 posts
15,336 battles

I have a buddy that hates everything about Carriers.  He plays DDs, Cruisers, Battleships.  Anything but CVs.  When he sees them, he complains non-stop about them.  But interestingly, even with the videos we saw early on when WG first showed the CV Rework was a thing, he was all aboard and greatly interested in trying them out.  He liked the look of the "taking control" of a unit of planes.

 

I say the CV Rework needs to push on.  If it can garner interest from someone that absolutely HATES Carriers and everything they stand for in the current game, it can help the CV population with the Rework in place.

 

Just get it right, no need to rush.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
64
[SPTR]
Members
1,650 posts
2,269 battles
Just now, BrushWolf said:

tenor.gif?itemid=8009273

The console version has nothing to do with the PC game. This was decided because CV's were an unrepairable train wreck.

 

At this point they should just give up on the re-work and CVs altogether if they can’t just fix the manual drops and strafing

that was literally the only thing they needed to remove to keep the class relevant

  • Cool 3
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
829
[DRACS]
Members
3,602 posts

The problem with the current iteration is that of multiple squadrons allowing total map visibility and spotting. A good CV player would light up a DD and just keep him lit until he was dead. Not to mention spotting torpedoes. Also, multiple squadrons allowed for cross drops.

None of those would be addressed with manual drops since you can set specific arcs for manual drops very easily and could still cross drop torps. And no manual drops still doesn't solve the spotting aspect.

In the end, Wargaming is going for a solution where all of a player's squadrons would be concentrated in one place at a time, greatly reducing their spotting and map control. Sadly, there are still some players who don't understand WHY this rework is happening and are simply comparing how they FEEL about it instead.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,523
[HINON]
Members
9,317 posts
3 minutes ago, Ace6steel said:

But the alpha strike is historical as CVs could counter virtually everything

in this game CVs are countered by cruisers with no-fly-zone AA

if people can’t multi-task thats their fault

Tutorial missions could’ve helped acclimate the vast change in play style

 

If we are going historical CVs are virtually never in actual sight of the enemy's surface ships and not at risk. They would also launch collectively hundreds of planes. WOWS is an arcade game that requires all ship types to be relatively balanced with one another. I know some players liked the rts style gameplay, and I get it, Midway was my first t10 afterall, but the gap of skill was too large for even tutorial missions to fix. An RTS type of warships game deserves to be a separate game entirely.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
64
[SPTR]
Members
1,650 posts
2,269 battles
1 minute ago, HazeGrayUnderway said:

I have a buddy that hates everything about Carriers.  He plays DDs, Cruisers, Battleships.  Anything but CVs.  When he sees them, he complains non-stop about them.  But interestingly, even with the videos we saw early on when WG first showed the CV Rework was a thing, he was all aboard and greatly interested in trying them out.  He liked the look of the "taking control" of a unit of planes.

 

I say the CV Rework needs to push on.  If it can garner interest from someone that absolutely HATES Carriers and everything they stand for in the current game, it can help the CV population with the Rework in place.

 

Just get it right, no need to rush.

While the re-work may be garnering the interest of new players it doesn’t help the fact that the lad players may not come back to the class

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,150
[WOLF3]
[WOLF3]
Members
16,846 posts
15,336 battles
Just now, Ace6steel said:

While the re-work may be garnering the interest of new players it doesn’t help the fact that the lad players may not come back to the class

It's coming, baby.  Maybe not in 1-2 months, but it's coming.  The current system is going out and I don't think many players will be shedding tears about it.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,523
[HINON]
Members
9,317 posts

In other news WOWS has announced on the development blog that the Odd tier CVs are actually going to reappear as a 2nd CV line.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,405
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
16,231 posts
9,570 battles
Just now, Ace6steel said:

At this point they should just give up on the re-work and CVs altogether if they can’t just fix the manual drops and strafing

that was literally the only thing they needed to remove to keep the class relevant

They would still be an unrepairable train wreck even with those changes.

1 minute ago, Ace6steel said:

While the re-work may be garnering the interest of new players it doesn’t help the fact that the lad players may not come back to the class

There are not enough people that stay with CV's to make keeping them viable with the current system.

1 minute ago, HazeGrayUnderway said:

It's coming, baby.  Maybe not in 1-2 months, but it's coming.  The current system is going out and I don't think many players will be shedding tears about it.

Only those that are married to the current system. The unicums I can understand but those that are a bet below average to a bit above average I don't understand unless it is because when they are the better CV player they get to seal club the lesser player.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,507
[RLGN]
Members
8,645 posts
17,894 battles
20 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

The unicums I can understand but those that are a bet below average to a bit above average I don't understand unless it is because when they are the better CV player they get to seal club the lesser player.

One of those average CV players here;

I absolutely HATE the rework because I consider the controls that were sold as being easier to use, HARDER to use.

The pacing is too fast, the targeting swings too wildly back and forth, and dodging AA is supposedly possible? that is another lie, and of course I don’t need to be distracted by my ship while staring at the ace ends of my planes for minutes on end.

This rework is going to be nothing more than trading one group of super players for another, with maybe a little overlap.

Edited by Estimated_Prophet
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,405
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
16,231 posts
9,570 battles
Just now, Estimated_Prophet said:

One of those average CV players here;

I absolutely HATE the rework because I consider the controls that were sold as being easier to use, HARDER to use.

The pacing is too fast, the targeting swings too wildly back and forth, dodge AA is supposed to be possible? that was another lie, and of course I don’t need to be distracted by my ship while if staring at the ace ends of my planes for minutes on end.

This rework is going to be nothing more that trading one group of super players for another, with maybe a little overlap.

The controls were a constant complaint even from the unicums. Personally I would have liked to see something that was more of a hybrid of the two systems but they chose this route and all we can do is try to help the new system be the best it can be.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
584
[-SYN-]
Members
2,753 posts
8,755 battles

What woudl be needed to preserve the current Cv model, and make it so that a 2% difference in skill isnt an unmitigated Roflstomp is

one - Get rid of Strafe.

two - Get rid of fiuckign strafe

three - get the [edited] rid of Strafe

Four - implement a plane HP system that the rework model uses instead of the retarded RNG roles which is currently implemented.

 

Strafe, it needs to go. This has caused the micromanagement requirement to absolutely skyrocket, plus it jsut allows higher skill players to utterly shut down lower skill players in ways not seen anywhere else in the game. So it depserately needs to go.

Second implementing an HP bar in the game reduces the effect of having problems with tier or plane number disparity. Currently AA and fighter mechanics don't actually use the planes stated HP bar. Rather the game manes and RNG roll and determines if a plane gets shot down. the number of RNG rolls is dependent on the number of planes in a squadron. This is what makes the dogfighting mechanics so horrible, because one unlucky RNG roll can result in a dogfight going very badly for one player and there is little they can do about it. If planes had an HP bar instead, then disadvantaged planes can at least inflict reasonable damage on a superior squadron. The HP system also means that weaker AA on ships can still at least do something instead of being as effective as flare guns. Its really this RNG system revolving around AA and plane survivabiltiy that is the root of many of the problems, not so much the RTS system. But the new system has proven that the new plane HP system is very much a step in the right direction. Manual drops for Attack aircraft aren't really a big problem, as that isn't that hard to master. its the strafe jockeying system that is total [edited].

Edited by ryuukei8569

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×