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

CV rework playtest thoughts from a CV Noob

39 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

2,730
[BRZKR]
WoWS Community Contributors
1,577 posts
5,345 battles

I suck at CVs and rarely play them.  So with that, I’m giving a no [edited] look and assessment of the rework.  I am both optimistic but highly cautious and a little worried.

This was my first round ever.  Needless to say I sucked trying to figure out the mechanics.  The better games I had apparently didn’t record.

Edited by NoZoupForYou
  • Cool 2
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,183
[OPRAH]
Beta Testers
5,315 posts
15,038 battles

The rework was not needed! Players just needed to learn how to use the CVs and other players needed to learn how to Task Force around the CV for mutual AA and fighter support. But Nooooooooooooo too many have to run off (ripe for picking off) , scatter like roaches (weakening the team) or hide in the back sniping (basically being useless) rather than work together toward the common goal! Winning. Oh yea CV just sitting in place waiting to be sunk while flying planes on a scenic flight to attempt sniping the enemy CV that is also sitting in spawn are useless also!

  • Cool 1
  • Bad 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,922
[ARGSY]
Members
10,148 posts
6,627 battles
4 minutes ago, CAPTMUDDXX said:

Players just needed to learn how to use the CVs

There's an inborn neurological element to being able to multitask well under pressure. Those who have it became very good CV players for the same level of battle experience that left others in the mediocre to average category. 

Two of the biggest gripes regarding CV's in the RTS era were regarding permaspotting everywhere and cross-map dominance, usually because the person doing the complaining had been on the losing side of a CV-mediated walkover. Those elements are now about to be removed, and it's the dominant CV players and their clanmates/regular divmates who are now screaming about the LOSS of that influence.

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,160
[DRACS]
Members
4,331 posts

I think the CV rework is fine, although it'll need balance tweaking for sure. I expect it to still be in a rough shape for the first six months of going live, with massive balance passes coming after.

The only area where I find the CV rework fails and fails utterly is in the inability to control one's carrier while strike planes are in the air. No other type needs to choose between maneuvering their ship and using consumables, and attacking other ships.

The entire community is angry about this, and have been very vocal about this, and WG insists it's not going to happen.

I fully expect this to change in the future when enough players complain to make the status quo untenable. 

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,922
[ARGSY]
Members
10,148 posts
6,627 battles
2 minutes ago, KaptainKaybe said:

I fully expect this to change in the future when enough players complain to make the status quo untenable. 

I'm going to wait and see what happens after a full patch worth of play in the live server, to see if it's even a problem.

WG themselves admitted they will need to do some fixes on the fly; the CV test server was never large or broad enough to be representative of full-scale play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,645
Members
22,283 posts
5,775 battles
16 minutes ago, CAPTMUDDXX said:

The rework was not needed!

It was, because this:

16 minutes ago, CAPTMUDDXX said:

Players just needed to learn how to use the CVs and other players needed to learn how to Task Force around the CV for mutual AA and fighter support. 

is 100% unenforceable.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,972
[RLGN]
Members
10,034 posts
19,434 battles

Workable and easier to use...

...unless you were never any good at manual attacks to begin with. The rework is manual attacks on steroids.

...except it WON’T remove the skill gap; it will just be a NEW skill gap, involving those who can master the manual attacks and using speed boost to help avoid AA, and those who can’t.

For all its oft-repeated flaws, MANAGING a carrier is what mad using them (RTS) interesting; for all the pro rework players seem to be crowing ‘mah simplicity! mah great visuals!’ after I finally figured out the controls, the new system quickly became rote damage farming and dull as hell...

...never mind the utter disconnect of rockets on planes never designed to use them and by a navy that never had them, and the lack of torpedo planes in an era when they were pioneered.

Edited by Estimated_Prophet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
528
[NATO]
Beta Testers
2,066 posts
6,203 battles
3 minutes ago, Ensign_Cthulhu said:

There's an inborn neurological element to being able to multitask well under pressure. Those who have it became very good CV players for the same level of battle experience that left others in the mediocre to average category. 

Two of the biggest gripes regarding CV's in the RTS era were regarding permaspotting everywhere and cross-map dominance, usually because the person doing the complaining had been on the losing side of a CV-mediated walkover. Those elements are now about to be removed, and it's the dominant CV players and their clanmates/regular divmates who are now screaming about the LOSS of that influence.

There are many players who dominate a given class of ship. There are those who excel at DD play and consistently do very well in them, how is having a good WR in a CV any different other than its a rally cry for those who despise the existence of CV's.

As for multi tasking, I really only hit my ability cap once I got to Taiho. So I guess you could say I can only keep track of 7 things at once without it being stressful. I loved US CV's for their simplicity.

Im far from a dominant CV player, perhaps above average but only in WR and am barely average in damage......and I think the rework stinks. Its taking a sledgehammer to a fly.

The rework will solve some problems, but it will create new ones and Im fairly certain it wont have the desired effect of having more CV players 6 months after release.

Since WG has decided that CV players can only do one thing at a time, I cant wait for the DD rework. DD's need to watch the mini map, their smoke, concealment, targets of opportunity and their own ships....clearly too much for the simpletons (according to WG!!) who play WoWs

 

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,922
[ARGSY]
Members
10,148 posts
6,627 battles
3 minutes ago, hipcanuck said:

Since WG has decided that CV players can only do one thing at a time, I cant wait for the DD rework. DD's need to watch the mini map, their smoke, concealment, targets of opportunity and their own ships....clearly too much for the simpletons (according to WG!!) who play WoWs

Strawman argument.

All other ship classes control ONE VEHICLE, their own ship.

CV players in RTS controlled MULTIPLE individual vehicles, attacking and defending with them, using them to spot and deny concealment.

Imagine going into a co-op battle and being able to control ALL the Green ships.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,726
[SYN]
[SYN]
Members
7,516 posts
11,524 battles

I think putting unbalanced carriers in the live game to balance them through the live server is a pretty awful idea.

It's not worth killing the main game as people get turned off by more commonplace and still broken carriers, just to save carriers (which aren't even being saved anyway...).

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,577
[SBS]
Members
3,782 posts
2,408 battles

My thoughts on the rework, its a gamble.  Does "fixing" CVs fix the game or break it?  At one point WG admitted the majority of the players didn't want to play against CVs.  I don't see that changing with CVs in every match, but rather making it worse.  At best, I see the reworked CVs being more toxic and divisive an element in the game than radar.  Let's all hope I turn out to be wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,464 posts
2,243 battles

I'm also optimistic about the CV rework. I'm one of the very few players who's played CV the most out of every ship class, and I think the RTS method would still work, but make the bomb and torpedo drops far more skill based and difficult to use.

CV rework still needs some massive fixes, like the ability to control your physical carrier even when you are using planes. That is an absolute must.

 

To be frank, if this rework fails and nobody plays CVs again. I think WG needs to simply delete CVs from all players and make them AI only.

While CV gameplay is by far my favorite gamemode (as it is right now before the rework), if WG is going to keep screwing up and change the balancing of CVs over AND OVER again. What's the point. Just take them out and make them AI only.

Edited by HBZK100

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,922
[ARGSY]
Members
10,148 posts
6,627 battles
1 minute ago, mofton said:

I think putting unbalanced carriers in the live game to balance them through the live server is a pretty awful idea.

Can you conceive of a reasonable alternative? Anything else will give you a small and IMO quite likely unrepresentative sample of the live server, which is the main problem I find with the existing PTS, to say nothing of the very small population that got to try out the new carriers.

Just now, Sensai_Lawrence said:

rockets?!  at tier 4?!? dafuq....

They used them against Zeppelins in WW1, so I guess WG felt free to take artistic licence. This is one of the things that has me raising my eyebrows. Another is the removal of torpedoes from T4 carriers, even though they had them from the dawn of the flat-top era, although this might have been a balancing act against the fact that a lot of the T3 ships they face have literally no AA armament at all.

1 minute ago, Slimeball91 said:

My thoughts on the rework, its a gamble.  Does "fixing" CVs fix the game or break it?  At one point WG admitted the majority of the players didn't want to play against CVs. 

It's a gamble they had to take, because nobody wanted to be in a 2-CV-a-side match where your own CV players were determined but inexperienced amateurs up against hard professionals, who wiped out the amateurs' air groups and then used their fighters for global permaspotting of everything while the bombers of both stripes ran rampant and unchecked. Now all the screaming is from the hardcore CV players and their friends who realise just how much power is being taken out of their hands; and while I do to a certain extent feel sorry for them, I can see why the decision was made.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,577
[SBS]
Members
3,782 posts
2,408 battles
Just now, Ensign_Cthulhu said:

It's a gamble they had to take...

You're ignoring an obvious solution that would be a far safer route.  Besides, you didn't address the core question, what will "fixing" CVs do to the game as a whole?  Let's be clear, the rework isn't fixing CVs, it only addresses some of the issues they have.  I have serious concerns about CVs being able to be balanced where players both playing CVs, and those playing against them, will enjoy the game.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
291
[CAST]
Members
1,525 posts
7,983 battles
23 minutes ago, HBZK100 said:

I'm also optimistic about the CV rework. I'm one of the very few players who's played CV the most out of every ship class, and I think the RTS method would still work, but make the bomb and torpedo drops far more skill based and difficult to use.

CV rework still needs some massive fixes, like the ability to control your physical carrier even when you are using planes. That is an absolute must.

Making a big divide between skill and non skill is why CVs are where they are now.  I don't mind the RTS element myself.  I didn't even mind the torp and bomb drops to an extent.  They were just too powerful, especially when combined with the ability to use fighters to completely eliminate any opponent planes from the game.  The CVs could have remained the same type of game play that they were before if they did the same thing they are doing now and made it such that each torp run only delivered 2 torps instead of 2 squadrons delivering 10 or more.  They could have also removed the ability to have fighters, or eliminate fighter strafes and limit the number of fighters or time in the air.  That would keep less experienced players in the game, which was part of the problem.

Yes, they definitely need the ability to control the carrier while in flight.

Edited by Murcc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,922
[ARGSY]
Members
10,148 posts
6,627 battles
Just now, Slimeball91 said:

You're ignoring an obvious solution that would be a far safer route. 

Removing them completely? Or do you have some other solution I'm overlooking?

Two things came to mind. The first was the elimination of strafing. The second was originally the removal of manual attacks, but then I realised this doesn't address the issue of a skilled multitasker being able to make attacks on both sides of the map when the beginner is still floundering. A better solution might have been the removal of AUTO attack, forcing the unicum to devote their full attention to what they were currently attacking, just as the rework will make them do.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,577
[SBS]
Members
3,782 posts
2,408 battles
Just now, Ensign_Cthulhu said:

Removing them completely?

Yes, I was referring to removing them completely.  Like I said, WG said the majority of the players didn't want to play against CVs.  That may not be the case now, the CV population might be so low now the rest of the players can sort of ignore the few games they pop up in.  I'll be shocked if players as a whole just accept CVs being in every match.  Maybe we get there at some point in the future, its likely to be a very bumpy road to get to that point though. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
727
[S0L0]
Alpha Tester
2,299 posts
3,234 battles

Skill gaps will remain...  Playerbase and skilled players always find a way to exploit mechanics in ways unintended or yet to be discovered by limited groups of testers..  What this is, is a complete reset of the ships.   With all the problems and lack of popularity of the old style it was needed.. I'm sure we are going to have balance issues galore for a while.  Clearly we are going to be Beta testing this live.    I suppose my biggest fear will be that WG allows more than two per team.. which IMO could lead back to almost many of the same problems and a big mistake.  Also I think divisions of multiple CVs cannot be allowed.   I'm anxious to see where they are with AA at this point also.. In last test.. it still seemed like AA was serious WIP.    all that being said after each round of testing I found myself dissapointed they ended it.. I was really looking forward to relearning them..  Just when i would start to feel effective they yanked them away?   I'm optimistic this is going to be popular which means a lot of players whom are not use to seeing full skies and threats from above on a regular basis and  will likely become even less fond of CVs.        

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,888
[_-_]
Members
1,744 posts
2 hours ago, Slimeball91 said:

At one point WG admitted the majority of the players didn't want to play against CVs.  I don't see that changing with CVs in every match, but rather making it worse.

 

Plan.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters, Beta Testers
5,748 posts
4,395 battles
3 hours ago, CAPTMUDDXX said:

The rework was not needed! Players just needed to learn how to use the CVs and other players needed to learn how to Task Force around the CV for mutual AA and fighter support. But Nooooooooooooo too many have to run off (ripe for picking off) , scatter like roaches (weakening the team) or hide in the back sniping (basically being useless) rather than work together toward the common goal! Winning. Oh yea CV just sitting in place waiting to be sunk while flying planes on a scenic flight to attempt sniping the enemy CV that is also sitting in spawn are useless also!

I kind of argue that some rework might've been needed since CVs didn't attract a huge part of the player-base.  Regardless of skill, "get gud" doesn't exactly bring the masses to the carrier playstyle, causing it to be either filled with "morons" (according to team-chat) or elitists - both of which aren't healthy for a game.

 

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters, Beta Testers
5,748 posts
4,395 battles
1 hour ago, Slimeball91 said:

Yes, I was referring to removing them completely.  Like I said, WG said the majority of the players didn't want to play against CVs.  That may not be the case now, the CV population might be so low now the rest of the players can sort of ignore the few games they pop up in.  I'll be shocked if players as a whole just accept CVs being in every match.  Maybe we get there at some point in the future, its likely to be a very bumpy road to get to that point though. 

Majority of players don't want to play CVs because of the skill-gap required to get gud in CVs.  I mean...it's much easier to go-kart around in gun-laden warships than play a RTS game in the sky.

Some rework was needed to bring more people to carriers, but it should be a mix of "rewarding good play" and "making it more accessible to the masses."

This isn't some elitist sport after all - World of Warships is a casual romp through naval history laden with real ships, paper ships, anime girls and ghost vessels.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters, Beta Testers
5,748 posts
4,395 battles
2 hours ago, Slimeball91 said:

My thoughts on the rework, its a gamble.  Does "fixing" CVs fix the game or break it?  At one point WG admitted the majority of the players didn't want to play against CVs.  I don't see that changing with CVs in every match, but rather making it worse.  At best, I see the reworked CVs being more toxic and divisive an element in the game than radar.  Let's all hope I turn out to be wrong.

Even radar these days isn't as divisive.  People grumble and rage, but they eventually adapt to the situation and move on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
379
[WOLF6]
Members
872 posts
3,379 battles
3 hours ago, Ensign_Cthulhu said:

There's an inborn neurological element to being able to multitask well under pressure. Those who have it became very good CV players for the same level of battle experience that left others in the mediocre to average category. 

Two of the biggest gripes regarding CV's in the RTS era were regarding permaspotting everywhere and cross-map dominance, usually because the person doing the complaining had been on the losing side of a CV-mediated walkover. Those elements are now about to be removed, and it's the dominant CV players and their clanmates/regular divmates who are now screaming about the LOSS of that influence.

This. I play carriers now reasonably well with the current RTS interface and enjoy the variety it offers though completely agree its popularity is in the toilet. I want to experience more carrier gameplay, both as and against and if the rework provides this then....good. I also don't enjoy the abuse in-game from either allied or red teams due to the influence a carrier can have on match outcomes. Very well put Cthulhu. 

Edited by Sumwunskum

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.

×