3,508 [RKLES] Admiral_Thrawn_1 Members 12,557 posts 14,317 battles Report post #1 Posted December 29, 2018 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
2,028 J30_Reinhardt Alpha Tester 10,267 posts 4,608 battles Report post #2 Posted December 29, 2018 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
3,766 [SQUAD] TheKrimzonDemon Members 9,176 posts 11,689 battles Report post #3 Posted December 29, 2018 Ah, no. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
2,566 [WOLF1] Kesh_Lives Members 5,988 posts Report post #4 Posted December 29, 2018 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] Destroyer_KuroshioKai WoWS Community Contributors 3,460 posts 13,610 battles Report post #5 Posted December 29, 2018 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
268 alex08060 Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters 2,809 posts 1,478 battles Report post #6 Posted December 29, 2018 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] KilljoyCutter [CMFRT] Members 16,565 posts Report post #7 Posted December 29, 2018 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. 2 1 4 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
1,222 [CVA16] Sabot_100 Members 5,681 posts 17,556 battles Report post #8 Posted December 29, 2018 (edited) 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 December 29, 2018 by Sabot_100 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
848 [WOOKY] Dareios Beta Testers 1,743 posts Report post #9 Posted December 29, 2018 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 Palladia Members 2,646 posts 4,301 battles Report post #10 Posted December 29, 2018 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] Turbotush Members 1,408 posts 38,658 battles Report post #11 Posted December 29, 2018 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. 3 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
3,508 [RKLES] Admiral_Thrawn_1 Members 12,557 posts 14,317 battles Report post #12 Posted December 29, 2018 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. 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
103 Canadian_Reaper Beta Testers 347 posts 6,269 battles Report post #13 Posted December 29, 2018 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
268 alex08060 Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters 2,809 posts 1,478 battles Report post #14 Posted December 29, 2018 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
2,028 J30_Reinhardt Alpha Tester 10,267 posts 4,608 battles Report post #15 Posted December 29, 2018 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] Admiral_Thrawn_1 Members 12,557 posts 14,317 battles Report post #16 Posted December 29, 2018 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
88 CaptainKiwi_2016 Members 523 posts Report post #17 Posted December 29, 2018 (edited) With WT getting surface vessels, and if the CV rework breaks the game, I think it might be time to veto. Edited December 29, 2018 by CaptainKiwi_2016 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
9,312 [CMFRT] KilljoyCutter [CMFRT] Members 16,565 posts Report post #18 Posted December 29, 2018 (edited) 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 December 29, 2018 by KilljoyCutter 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
240 Krupp_Sabot Members 1,289 posts 2,399 battles Report post #19 Posted December 29, 2018 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] KilljoyCutter [CMFRT] Members 16,565 posts Report post #20 Posted December 29, 2018 (edited) 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 December 29, 2018 by KilljoyCutter Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
4,501 [WOLF7] awiggin Members 12,601 posts Report post #21 Posted December 29, 2018 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 whale" business 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
88 CaptainKiwi_2016 Members 523 posts Report post #22 Posted December 30, 2018 (edited) 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 December 30, 2018 by CaptainKiwi_2016 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
4,409 [IRNBN] Balon_Greyjoy Members 3,699 posts 10,764 battles Report post #23 Posted December 30, 2018 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] ZARDOZ_II Members 3,238 posts 13,937 battles Report post #24 Posted December 30, 2018 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. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
88 CaptainKiwi_2016 Members 523 posts Report post #25 Posted December 30, 2018 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