Jump to content
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
Admiral_Thrawn_1

Possible Concern over CV Rework becoming OP

36 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

3,508
[RKLES]
Members
12,557 posts
14,317 battles

Since the Fighters will be able to fly much faster, will have rockets, and AA range will be shorter. Will the rockets end up being OP if they light fires on armored ships like BBs or possibly devastate the AA after 1 or 2 passes leaving the BB and perhaps CA battle lines with little to no AA and some fires burning.

The test Sever is not for Mac, so I can’t either confirm these suspicions or lay them to rest. Any data on this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
10,267 posts
4,608 battles

I ran one game in Round 3 of nothing but fighters and posted a screenshot of the results but I forgot what topic its in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,566
[WOLF1]
Members
5,988 posts

So far, CVs can do damage still, but there's a lot less peaks and valleys; i.e. a lot less one-shots, etc, but more steady hits.  Also, you can't light up the whole map with one carrier.  Also, even 3 CVs have only 3 groups in the air, same as a Langley can do by itself now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,148
[CVLUL]
WoWS Community Contributors
3,460 posts
13,610 battles

Players have been under the delusion that CVs are going to be balanced like any other ship type.  NOPE.

CVs will always have major influence over games.  All they have done is greatly reduce the time a CV needs to spend defending his team mates, all so he can strike more.  More likely the CV saves his fighters for personal defense so he can farm even longer.  Not going to cause any salt at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
2,809 posts
1,478 battles

You can citadel with dive bombers as well and torpedo planes will be torpedo planes. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,312
[CMFRT]
[CMFRT]
Members
16,565 posts

WG isn't doing this to balance carriers.  They're not addressing anything that actually affected balance. 

They're doing this to share dev costs and time and effort with the console version, and because they think it will get more carriers in play. 

  • Cool 2
  • Boring 1
  • Meh 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,222
[CVA16]
Members
5,681 posts
17,556 battles

Even if the planes are not completely OP, the attacks mostly dodgeable, it will still be bad if you have to spend large parts of the game in total defense mode, dodging waves of attacks that spot you and turn and keep you broadside to the enemy.

For DDs it SHOULD be better since there is no permaspotting fighters hovering over you. The initial glut of CVs will still make it miserable. Have to see what multiple waves of rocket planes can do to ships that often have no effective AA.

Anybody KNOW if CV divisions will now be allowed?

Edited by Sabot_100

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
848
[WOOKY]
Beta Testers
1,743 posts

my testing leads me to believe that the 'average' saturation rocket will consistently light fires but do very low damage, so low as to rarely impact the aa mounts.

The US tiny tims will kill mounts, but theres like 4 of them per volley and they rarely set fires so not much of an issue from them either.

Id be more worried about the DB, once the average player works out how to use them.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,313
Members
2,646 posts
4,301 battles

Eh,  hard to say.  Active maneuvering is really helping to mitigate damage on the test server but having to run co-ops to make sure I get games is hampering testing.  I need some full matches to get a better idea of how stacked AA is going to affect planes and to see how people react and don't react to various plane attacks.  

One thing to note is that while alpha damage has been nerfed into the floor,  everyone is now more in line with whats considered one of the better strategies for CV's currently,  DoT stacking.  The way things work on test is that you're going to wind up spending enough time circling back around that lighter damage control parties will already be done,  and by the time your third strike comes around even a battleships damage control will be up.  This is going to heavily punish people who repair single fires but its ALSO going to hurt people who only con on multiple fires or a flood,  since you have to sit and wait for a decent duration of the original fires or flood.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,505
[TWFT]
Members
1,408 posts
38,658 battles

The biggest problem is now we will have a ship that used to take a lot of skill to be effective but now will be able to effect the match even if the player is not as skilled.  This is just going to make the game crap with CV's in most every match.

I just don't get why CV's are even in the game, I know we want to have this whole historical thing going, but man the ship just doesn't fit!  It needs it's own game.

  • Cool 3
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,508
[RKLES]
Members
12,557 posts
14,317 battles
20 minutes ago, KilljoyCutter said:

WG isn't doing this to balance carriers.  They're not addressing anything that actually affected balance. 

They're doing this to share dev costs and time and effort with the console version, and because they think it will get more carriers in play. 

If CVs get too overwhelming to surface ships Wargaming will not need to worry about Dev costs for WOWs anymore. There will be no players left to fund their game and things will collapse. :Smile_amazed:

Many players seem to prefer surface Warships and not air based combats in WOWs after all. Even heard some players in some of my battles discussing how even submarines would be better to fight against than CV aircraft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
347 posts
6,269 battles

I don't play CV's but a friend who does, was going to quit over this change (he liked the RTS) has changed his tune, says they're more powerful now, as (apparently) you can attack multiple times with a flight, so you can flood, wait 20 seconds or so, flood again.

He did say the PTS was messed up (a lot of bots) so not sure if it will work the same in live, but sounds like it's going to be fun for CV players, less fun for non CV.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
2,809 posts
1,478 battles

Best defence against dive bombers is to zig zag a lot. Makes it hard to citadel. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
10,267 posts
4,608 battles
4 minutes ago, alex08060 said:

Best defence against dive bombers is to zig zag a lot. Makes it hard to citadel. 

Vary your speed too if you can.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,508
[RKLES]
Members
12,557 posts
14,317 battles
1 hour ago, Canadian_Reaper said:

I don't play CV's but a friend who does, was going to quit over this change (he liked the RTS) has changed his tune, says they're more powerful now, as (apparently) you can attack multiple times with a flight, so you can flood, wait 20 seconds or so, flood again.

He did say the PTS was messed up (a lot of bots) so not sure if it will work the same in live, but sounds like it's going to be fun for CV players, less fun for non CV.

Honestly as I have said, it’s far more dangerous to keep creasing CV power since the CV playerbase is smaller than the non CV playerbase. So if CVs get too powerful and the non CV p,Ayers were to quit, what happens to the game?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,312
[CMFRT]
[CMFRT]
Members
16,565 posts
3 hours ago, CaptainKiwi_2016 said:

With WT getting surface vessels, and if the CV rework breaks the game, I think it might be time to veto. 

No interest in getting into another game only to have what's happening here, happen to that game too. 

Between the way easy "updates" have ruined game development and allowed the makers to ruin games after they're already published, and the way more and more games require the installation of bloated malware (Steam, Origin, WGC, etc) on the customer's computer just to allow them the "privilege" of using the actual product (the game), I'm done with video games and the entire industry. 

This is the last game I play now... if I walk away from WOWS, I'm done with video games completely.

 

Edited by KilljoyCutter
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,289 posts
2,399 battles
35 minutes ago, KilljoyCutter said:

No interest in getting into another game only to have what's happening here, happen to that game too. 

Between the way easy "updates" have ruined game development and allowed the makers to ruin games after they're already published, and the way more and more games require the installation of bloated malware (Steam, Origin, WGC, etc) on the customer's computer just to allow them the "privilege" of using the actual product (the game), I'm done with video games and the entire industry. 

This is the last game I play now... if I walk away from WOWS, I'm done with video games completely.

 

GoG doesn't require any such software and has many great classics on thier platform too. Consider them before walking out on a great hobby.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,312
[CMFRT]
[CMFRT]
Members
16,565 posts
18 minutes ago, Krupp_Sabot said:

GoG doesn't require any such software and has many great classics on thier platform too. Consider them before walking out on a great hobby.

The last game I got from GOG still installed parts of the Galaxy "download manager" despite me buying it as the straight classic download version, and kept trying to "phone home" regardless of what I did. 

At this point I don't trust any gaming outlet or company. 

 

Edited by KilljoyCutter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,501
[WOLF7]
Members
12,601 posts
59 minutes ago, KilljoyCutter said:

No interest in getting into another game only to have what's happening here, happen to that game too. 

Between the way easy "updates" have ruined game development and allowed the makers to ruin games after they're already published, and the way more and more games require the installation of bloated malware (Steam, Origin, WGC, etc) on the customer's computer just to allow them the "privilege" of using the actual product (the game), I'm done with video games and the entire industry. 

This is the last game I play now... if I walk away from WOWS, I'm done with video games completely.

 

The problem is the entire FTP mindset by the companies.

They've bought into the whole "milk the whalebusiness plan, because it doesn't require them to put to much effort or quality into the game itself.

It's far easier and cheaper to hire graphic artists and create shiny objects that the whales will gobble up at an absurd price, rather than invest in game play, and perhaps actually persuade a larger portion of your player base that the game is worth investing in.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
523 posts
19 hours ago, KilljoyCutter said:

No interest in getting into another game only to have what's happening here, happen to that game too. 

Between the way easy "updates" have ruined game development and allowed the makers to ruin games after they're already published, and the way more and more games require the installation of bloated malware (Steam, Origin, WGC, etc) on the customer's computer just to allow them the "privilege" of using the actual product (the game), I'm done with video games and the entire industry. 

This is the last game I play now... if I walk away from WOWS, I'm done with video games completely.

 

I usually go back to classic well known games that I can install without Steam and without internet connection. Having to have internet to install games + required Steam connection has ruined PC games today. Call of Duty Black Ops 1 was the first and last game I ever bought that required internet and Steam connection. Nowadays I usually buy older classic games for reasons already stated above. As for these so-called "F2P" games, I'm just  about done with them, and that includes War Thunder. I guess its back to Battlestations: Pacific for me. 

Edited by CaptainKiwi_2016

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,409
[IRNBN]
Members
3,699 posts
10,764 battles
On 12/28/2018 at 9:13 PM, Canadian_Reaper said:

He did say the PTS was messed up (a lot of bots) so not sure if it will work the same in live, but sounds like it's going to be fun for CV players, less fun for non CV.

PTS is always a bit weird and bot-filled. Much lower human populations than the live servers. Also, much less communication on teams due to language barrier. Add to that, the test servers are also running a lot of analytical tools to aid the devs evaluation.

You're right about one thing. As the CV guys get better at aiming and timing, unless the next couple rounds of PT before live deployment un-borks the AA system non-CV classes, especially BB, are in for a very bad time indeed.

This is the first of 3 planned rounds of PT before deployment, and much could change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,099
[4HIM]
Members
3,238 posts
13,937 battles
23 hours ago, CaptainKiwi_2016 said:

With WT getting surface vessels, and if the CV rework breaks the game, I think it might be time to veto. 

But in WT, the plane spam is also pretty bad.  The incessant rain of planes in "Ground Forces" battles is what led me to quit WT.  I'd just like to find a surface combat game without all the sky vermin.  

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
523 posts
Just now, ZARDOZ_II said:

But in WT, the plane spam is also pretty bad.  The incessant rain of planes in "Ground Forces" battles is what led me to quit WT.  I'd just like to find a surface combat game without all the sky vermin.  

As I mentioned; I'll be reviving Battlestations: Pacific. I have a mod that allows me to play crazy OP versions of Nagato, Mutsu, Musashi, Yamato, Scharnhorst, Bismarck, Montana, North Carolina, Alaska, Brooklyn, and for luls, the Arleigh-Burke Class DDG. The AA on these aforementioned ships is INSANE! Say goodbye to sky cancer when you let rip with these ships! Though a hit to the magazine is an insta-kill, the same goes for the enemy ships too. Aim well, hit well, and you will be able to knock out entire fleets with ease! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×