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

A different review of the new CV changes.

42 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

95
[SC]
Alpha Tester
233 posts
7,511 battles

I am sure I am going to be down voted and stomped on for this but I must say the new carrier mechanic is very fun and engaging.  Every post on here says the same 3 things and I feel like the people saying these things have yet to even play the game with the new carriers.

Everybody says, oh unlimited planes how stupid how can we stand an unlimited barrage of planes all the time.  This is not exactly how it works.  They are "unlimited" but they have a refresh rate and you can't just launch wave after wave of a single type of plane.  If you do that you end up with 4 planes in your squad as opposed to say 8 or 10 or 12.  Also the ability to dump your squad and switch while nice when a DD is bearing down on you (mind you this was an instant death if your team didn't help you before) you can now defend yourself a bit by trying to at least hit them with rockets or bombs or even torps but none of those are one shot easy kill type situations.

Second thing everybody says, constant harassment, this just isn't the case either if a CV is doing nothing but spotting or shooting one thing then they are not helping the team and its very much the same as chasing a boat to the corner of the map and leaving you team and the caps to do that.  Also you only have one group to sit over a DD or CV now and if you are doing that you are doing ZERO to anything on the map.  Lastly spotting is LOS for planes now so if you are a dd you need to user terrain more now than before.

Third is My AA sucks I don't shoot down anything, while this is true I can tell you Flak really messes you up and the enemy CV fighters when used correctly are a death sentence to your squadron of planes.  If you are in a match and your CV is stupid and not using his fighters to 1 protect high priority targets, or 2 himself then he doesn't know what he is doing.  Also if he does launch his fighters and you are shooting them with your aa you won't get the kills IMO the fighters are a bit too strong as if you are caught in the circle your group is done, not to mention still trying to avoid flak all the while trying to drop bombs on a target.

I have played lots of matches in the new CV setup from the first test stage to now and I really enjoy the difference in play, each new version gets better and better with more balance and better play.  Please give them some time to balance this out and test more with real players and play before you fly off the handle and say I am leaving the game and WG sucks and carriers need to die.  This is the same as the smoke fire changes, and the blind fire changes and the radar, the community freaks out and in a few months it moves on to the new thing that is coming out.  If the game does not evolve it will lose players for sure, most likely more than if they do try and change things and it takes a bit to fix it.

 

 

  • Cool 17
  • Boring 1
  • Meh 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
148
[SHAN]
Beta Testers
466 posts

Game has never broke 20k at peak. Game almost never breaks 15k at peak. WG made their bed and get to sleep in it.

 

Cirran

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 1
  • Meh 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,934
[CNO]
Members
6,074 posts
18,524 battles
12 minutes ago, Seagrizzly said:

I have played lots of matches in the new CV setup from the first test stage to now and I really enjoy the difference in play, each new version gets better and better with more balance and better play.  Please give them some time to balance this out and test more with real players and play before you fly off the handle and say I am leaving the game and WG sucks and carriers need to die.  This is the same as the smoke fire changes, and the blind fire changes and the radar, the community freaks out and in a few months it moves on to the new thing that is coming out.  If the game does not evolve it will lose players for sure, most likely more than if they do try and change things and it takes a bit to fix it.

Yeah.  I haven't played any in the PTS, but I've watched a lot of the videos, heard the commentary, and read posts herein. This change won't be perfect out of the gate, and I suspect there will be some growing pains.  But I can't objectively see it as breaking anything.  Just let it roll out.  Adjust as needed.  WG will adjust as needed.  And move along.  I'm sure no matter what they do, there will be some who don't like it.  But that's normal human DNA.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,850 posts
5,566 battles

Nice. At least some good, positive feedback. Nice to know some players also understand the diminishing mechanics with regards to the unlimited aircraft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,262
[RLGN]
Members
14,900 posts
26,419 battles
5 hours ago, Sumseaman said:

Nice. At least some good, positive feedback. Nice to know some players also understand the diminishing mechanics with regards to the unlimited aircraft.

Understanding that and still disliking the rework are two separate things.

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,169
[HINON]
Alpha Tester, Alpha Tester
2,562 posts
4,805 battles
6 hours ago, Sumseaman said:

Nice. At least some good, positive feedback. Nice to know some players also understand the diminishing mechanics with regards to the unlimited aircraft.

Some (certainly those who I have talked to) who have actually played the PTS fully understand that.  Many people, however, prefer to pick "facts" that support their own arguments even if those facts don't exist and listen to other people say things that they would like to hear, than actually find out and then try to shout others down.   This debate is no different from many other debates in the past on this and other games forums by seasoned forum warriors who know better than any other player and even better than the game developers.

You know that as soon as someone says.. "but the majority say"  or  "all of us" that any following argument dissapears at that point :)

  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,097
[KNMSU]
Members
7,086 posts
7,766 battles

Nice to see the OP acknowledge and then casually brush aside crippling concerns over AA performance and near constant attacks.

We can all watch the videos - it's pretty plain that this is a sweetheart megabuff for CVs and a flat-out crushing blow to every other ship type.

Edited by Battlecruiser_Kongo
  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,850 posts
5,566 battles
4 minutes ago, Battlecruiser_Kongo said:

Nice to see the OP acknowledge and then casually brush aside crippling concerns over AA performance and near constant attacks.

We can all watch the videos - it's pretty plain that this is a sweetheart megabuff for CVs and a flat-out crushing blow to every other ship type.

Don't mean to be aggressive but have you tried the PTS? Watching the vids only gives you a very small glimpse. If you have tested then yes...fine. The AA likely does need some changes. Constant attacks occur from all ship classes. Potential damage really racks up in battles with zero carriers.

Share this post


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

Don't mean to be aggressive but have you tried the PTS? Watching the vids only gives you a very small glimpse. If you have tested then yes...fine. The AA likely does need some changes. Constant attacks occur from all ship classes. Potential damage really racks up in battles with zero carriers.

This.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,169
[HINON]
Alpha Tester, Alpha Tester
2,562 posts
4,805 battles
48 minutes ago, Battlecruiser_Kongo said:

Nice to see the OP acknowledge and then casually brush aside crippling concerns over AA performance and near constant attacks.

We can all watch the videos - it's pretty plain that this is a sweetheart megabuff for CVs and a flat-out crushing blow to every other ship type.

Like the video that showes a Montana focused for a whole game by 2 T10 CV's and survives the battle whilst only loosing half it's health and shoots down 2, nearly 3 squadrons of aircraft and outperforms both of the carriers on his team and those on the enemy team?   Seems to me that in the current meta, a single T10 BB focused by 2 T10 carriers would have an active life in the game of seconds before being dead and wouldn't shoot down nearly as many a/c, and this is hailed as a video that shows how overpowered carriers are and how underpowered AA is?

Look at the number of a/c shot down in that battle by the green team ...   66 aircraft when a flight is 12 a/c (if they have all reloaded every time which at T10 is unlikely so probably 6/7 flights/squadrons).  Look at how little damage even a 2 torp hit does by comparison to what they used to do.   AA and CV's is a different balance now..  comparing it to what went before is ALWAYS going to be different and wrong, because the basic premise is different.  If you compare new stats to old stats, you are cherry picking to make a point that doesn't exist.

Oh, and by the way,  His constant ( and unneeded) switching sides of his AA every few seconds is badly harming his ability to provide AA cover..  it's almost like he wants his figures to be bad by always presenting under 100% to the side being attacked.

I'm not saying that there won't need to be balance, but what I am saying is that , certainly for me, will make the whole class better balanced in the game and appeal to more people than the current way of playing which has been broken since Alpha.

Certainly from the PTS, I have no problem now with 2 or even 3 carriers in the game, because it's not an instant death sentence to anyone even if all three focus you, and THAT is a step in the right direction.

PS.. my personal best score in a game so far is 42 T10 aircraft downed in a single match with 2 T10 carriers on the opposing team in an Alsace when I didn't flip sides for AA once.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
10,267 posts
4,608 battles
10 minutes ago, MaliceA4Thought said:

Like the video that showes a Montana focused for a whole game by 2 T10 CV's and survives the battle whilst only loosing half it's health and shoots down 2, nearly 3 squadrons of aircraft and outperforms both of the carriers on his team and those on the enemy team?   Seems to me that in the current meta, a single T10 BB focused by 2 T10 carriers would have an active life in the game of seconds before being dead and wouldn't shoot down nearly as many a/c, and this is hailed as a video that shows how overpowered carriers are and how underpowered AA is?

Look at the number of a/c shot down in that battle by the green team ...   66 aircraft when a flight is 12 a/c (if they have all reloaded every time which at T10 is unlikely so probably 6/7 flights).  Look at how little damage even a 2 torp hit does by comparison to what they used to do.   AA and CV's is a different balance now..  comparing it to what went before is ALWAYS going to be different and wrong, because the basic premise is different.  If you compare new stats to old stats, you are cherry picking to make a point that doesn't exist.

Oh, and by the way,  His constant ( and unneeded) switching sides of his AA every few seconds is badly harming his ability to provide AA cover..  it's almost like he wants his figures to be bad by always presenting under 100% to the side being attacked.

I'm not saying that there won't need to be balance, but what I am saying is that , certainly for me, will make the whole class better balanced in the game and appeal to more people than the current way of playing which has been broken since Alpha.

Certainly from the PTS, I have no problem now with 2 or even 3 carriers in the game, because it's not an instant death sentence to anyone even if all three focus you, and THAT is a step in the right direction.

PS.. my personal best score in a game so far is 42 T10 aircraft downed in a single match with 2 T10 carriers on the opposing team in an Alsace when I didn't flip sides for AA once.

I wouldn't mind watching that so I can reference it constantly. Got a link?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,169
[HINON]
Alpha Tester, Alpha Tester
2,562 posts
4,805 battles
Just now, J30_Reinhardt said:

I wouldn't mind watching that so I can reference it constantly. Got a link?

Needs to be watched objectively, not looking to prove a point either way :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
10,267 posts
4,608 battles
6 minutes ago, MaliceA4Thought said:

Needs to be watched objectively, not looking to prove a point either way :)

Thanks mal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
587 posts
1,640 battles
1 hour ago, MaliceA4Thought said:

Needs to be watched objectively, not looking to prove a point either way :)

The problem I have with all 3 of these videos Notser did is that he didn't play any carriers to see how they work before posting them.  It's shoddy journalism (I suppose what he does is modern day journalism) to only present one side of the story especially when you are as influential as he is in this community.  So much of the stuff he's complaining about in these videos, it's clear he doesn't understand how it works for the CV player because he hasn't played it.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,389
[INTEL]
Members
13,459 posts
37,304 battles
9 hours ago, Seagrizzly said:

I am sure I am going to be down voted and stomped on for this but I must say the new carrier mechanic is very fun and engaging.  Every post on here says the same 3 things and I feel like the people saying these things have yet to even play the game with the new carriers.

*sigh*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,389
[INTEL]
Members
13,459 posts
37,304 battles
41 minutes ago, MaliceA4Thought said:

Certainly from the PTS, I have no problem now with 2 or even 3 carriers in the game, because it's not an instant death sentence to anyone even if all three focus you, and THAT is a step in the right direction.

Yes, it will be. If the torp and DB drops are staggered by several CVs, it will be very easy for a div of Sky Artillery to kill ships by flooding and fire, especially since AA has so little effect now. Right now on the PTS the CV drivers aren't used to their CVs yet. Soon they will acquire experience with the new Sky Artillery system, and begin being far more effective against fodderbotes, whose AA cannot be changed by skills, which means that experience is of little value. 

And no, that Montana isn't very representative in either direction. Been playing Helena in the PTS and getting very few kills on strike aircraft. Last time around a cooperative Red Lex captain walked his planes up and down my Helena (DFAA, AA module, BFT, fighter) every single run, far more than he needed to and lost... 2 strike planes. I got some kills on fighters but only RNG on the DBs saved me from an early exit. The fighter had some modest effect, but the AA may as well not even have existed. Found that too with other ships on the PTS. I keep trying with Worchester but so far no games, not enough ppl on the server.

Three CVs are going to turn gameplay to garbage. That leaves only 9 ships actually playing the game, which means that games will become even faster collapses since under 9v9 conditions with Sky Artillery the firepower disparity between teams once ships are lost will grow too fast in most matches, especially at high tiers in which most matches are already stupid collapses. 

WG may find that it needs to increase the number of ships in matches as one response to the introduction of Sky Artillery.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,312
Members
2,646 posts
4,285 battles

I am enjoying T6 and up.  T4 CV's on test are a bit of an exercise  in frustration but I really only need to worry about that with the up and coming RN CV's.  I still prefer the RTS system ((Pre-strafe)) but I understand the reason for the change.

There are issues with the system,  but they can and will largely be dealt with.  The sky is not falling.  This is not the end of the game.  There will be a burst of activity where people play the new shiney,  then we'll settle back down into a world where there are more CV's with less of an affect on the overall battle.

  • Cool 1
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,169
[HINON]
Alpha Tester, Alpha Tester
2,562 posts
4,805 battles
1 hour ago, Taichunger said:

Yes, it will be. If the torp and DB drops are staggered by several CVs, it will be very easy for a div of Sky Artillery

They are not artillery, they are not fire and forget, they are in your face weapon systems just like guns are in the game now.

to kill ships by flooding and fire,

rather like being focused by ONE HE slinging cruiser perhaps

especially since AA has so little effect now.

Not the case if properly set up and you correctly use the sector defenses and these PTS levels are not final.  they are higher on PTS than they were on previous tests and still being looked at.

Right now on the PTS the CV drivers aren't used to their CVs yet.

No agreed and they are mostly playing with bots who do not evade or hide in smoke or anything else a real person does and they are deffinately not an instant win mechanic like they can be today.

Soon they will acquire experience with the new Sky Artillery  (see point 1 above) system, and begin being far more effective against fodderbotes,

Actually the torpedo damage and bomb damage has been dialled way down..  a single carrier strike is not the instant delete it currently is

whose AA cannot be changed by skills,

Yes it can

which means that experience is of little value. 

Disagree
 

Have you played a carrier on PTS at each of the levels to see what really happens?  and your use of the phrase artllery and your signature tells me that you may alrady have an agenda in all of this, also bear in mind that WG has stated many many times that AA is not in it's final iteration but until it gets onto live, final figures cannot be assigned as there are not sufficient people playing the PTS, even though there seem to be a lot more whining about the PTS than players on it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,169
[HINON]
Alpha Tester, Alpha Tester
2,562 posts
4,805 battles
35 minutes ago, Palladia said:

I am enjoying T6 and up.  T4 CV's on test are a bit of an exercise  in frustration but I really only need to worry about that with the up and coming RN CV's.  I still prefer the RTS system ((Pre-strafe)) but I understand the reason for the change.

There are issues with the system,  but they can and will largely be dealt with.  The sky is not falling.  This is not the end of the game.  There will be a burst of activity where people play the new shiney,  then we'll settle back down into a world where there are more CV's with less of an affect on the overall battle.

I agree that 4 is miserable and will likely put a lot of people off playing carriers as they are completely innefective.  However, that's for WG to worry about with new players, I will prebuy the T6 carriers before 8.0 hits to avoid that T4 uselessness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
587 posts
1,640 battles
10 minutes ago, MaliceA4Thought said:

Have you played a carrier on PTS at each of the levels to see what really happens?  and your use of the phrase artllery and your signature tells me that you may alrady have an agenda in all of this.

You think?  lol

While I do think the short range AA needs to be beefed up a little bit, most of wailing and gnashing of teeth about AA is coming from people who have no first hand experience with it.  Most have just watched the videos Notser put out which as I said earlier, give a completely 1 sided account of the state of the game on PTS.  I normally enjoy Notser's content but he dropped the ball in putting those videos out before playing a CV so that he could provide some balance in his commentary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
587 posts
1,640 battles
1 minute ago, MaliceA4Thought said:

I agree that 4 is miserable and will likely put a lot of people off playing carriers as they are completely innefective.  However, that's for WG to worry about with new players, I will prebuy the T6 carriers before 8.0 hits to avoid that T4 uselessness.

I don't know.  I played one game in a tier 4 carrier because it was the only time that a game actually popped for that tier out of all the times I tried to queue with it.  It was my first game with one of the new CVs so everything was a learning process.  I still managed to get 18,000 damage and that isn't terrible for tier 4.  It's not what I would call good but considering I had no idea of how to even release my weapons when the game started, I thought it was decent.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,169
[HINON]
Alpha Tester, Alpha Tester
2,562 posts
4,805 battles
2 minutes ago, _HatTrick_ said:

You think?  lol

While I do think the short range AA needs to be beefed up a little bit, most of wailing and gnashing of teeth about AA is coming from people who have no first hand experience with it.  Most have just watched the videos Notser put out which as I said earlier, give a completely 1 sided account of the state of the game on PTS.  I normally enjoy Notser's content but he dropped the ball in putting those videos out before playing a CV so that he could provide some balance in his commentary.

LOL  Sub_O has already posted that he agrees that close range AA will need an improvement as it has recieved each of the testing sessions so far..  WG's issue is that the PTS is really sparse, especially with so many people claiming to have a view of whats happening that inevitably it will have to go live for final ballancing.

But hey.. thats life :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,169
[HINON]
Alpha Tester, Alpha Tester
2,562 posts
4,805 battles
2 minutes ago, _HatTrick_ said:

I don't know.  I played one game in a tier 4 carrier because it was the only time that a game actually popped for that tier out of all the times I tried to queue with it.  It was my first game with one of the new CVs so everything was a learning process.  I still managed to get 18,000 damage and that isn't terrible for tier 4.  It's not what I would call good but considering I had no idea of how to even release my weapons when the game started, I thought it was decent.  

I put together some of my thoughts in the PTS 8 feedback section and did some numerical analasys which you may find interesting. 

I just think it needs a bit of adjustment.

PS 18,000 is good..  was that US carrier with HE bombs or IJN with AP bombs?

M

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.

×