So my take. Time to weigh in.

[xTheCanadianx]

Ok so some of You (heavy emphasis on some btw since theres a lot I feel) dont like the new Cv work.

I feel to be the other side of the spectrum.  I like it.    Lets be fair the old rts view got stagnant and boring, carriers simply were not evolving like other ships were.  While I would like to see the ability to have fighter squadron dogfights at some point, this patch is a step in the right direction I must say. I do like it and do have fun

However to be honest at wg here  some ships AA is over the top  IE  plane meets brick wall, and some ships just arent strong enough in the aa department now.   Hell my Kutusov feels like it got neutered.  that could use some adjustments, not the end of the world, but definitley needs looked at.

I feel some of the rage I have seen in some posts is placed with good intentions,  alot of these aa issues could have been hammered out on the test server before hitting live theres simply no reason they couldnt, I hate to call it out but as a former tester the reasoning given is a flat out joke, but I'll leave that there as thats simply not being constructive.

torps could use a slight damage buff, the current damage makes sense for torpedo bulges but a midships hit on a dd for 1500hp?? come on guys.  

as well the tiny tims on midway could use some love, I dont see any real damage potential from them at the moment as they over pen practically everything they hit, but on Enterprise their like the hand of god reaching out and slapping a dd with neptunes fork.

so over all I like the patch,  but I do feel it needs some tweaks.

 

[EvelAye]

I untied my Ryuko port queen and played 2 co-op games yesterday. Didn't enjoy it. Actually think I liked the old style better. If they removed CV's from the game altogether, I wouldn't miss them. At the dock she will stay.

[JCC45]

22 minutes ago, xThecanadianx said:

Ok so some of You (heavy emphasis on some btw since theres a lot I feel) dont like the new Cv work.

I feel to be the other side of the spectrum.  I like it.    Lets be fair the old rts view got stagnant and boring, carriers simply were not evolving like other ships were.  While I would like to see the ability to have fighter squadron dogfights at some point, this patch is a step in the right direction I must say. I do like it and do have fun

However to be honest at wg here  some ships AA is over the top  IE  plane meets brick wall, and some ships just arent strong enough in the aa department now.   Hell my Kutusov feels like it got neutered.  that could use some adjustments, not the end of the world, but definitley needs looked at.

I feel some of the rage I have seen in some posts is placed with good intentions,  alot of these aa issues could have been hammered out on the test server before hitting live theres simply no reason they couldnt, I hate to call it out but as a former tester the reasoning given is a flat out joke, but I'll leave that there as thats simply not being constructive.

torps could use a slight damage buff, the current damage makes sense for torpedo bulges but a midships hit on a dd for 1500hp?? come on guys.  

as well the tiny tims on midway could use some love, I dont see any real damage potential from them at the moment as they over pen practically everything they hit, but on Enterprise their like the hand of god reaching out and slapping a dd with neptunes fork.

so over all I like the patch,  but I do feel it needs some tweaks.

 

So you post your reasons why you like the rework along with reasonable suggestions for improvementsand someone down votes you for your opinion.

And people wonder why they aren't being taken seriously.

[xTheCanadianx]

1 minute ago, JCC45 said:

So you post your reasons why you like the rework and someone down votes you for your opinion.

And people wonder why they aren't being taken seriously.

eh it's just a  forum downvote.  no big loss

[JCC45]

Just now, xThecanadianx said:

eh it's just a  forum downvote.  no big loss

It goes to the mindset.   

The haters will be along shortly.

[enderland07]

Try playing at TX with two average CVs on each team.

Then play at TX with one or two above average CVs on each team.

And, if you're really unlucky, play at TX with two unicums playing CVs on each team or just the enemy team.

 

I am 100% convinced the people who are in support of the rework have not played much at TX in 2-CV games (or even 1 CV games, for that matter). The continual presence of CVs has destroyed the meta and quickly will lead to the same problem that PTS had - not enough players to make a decision. 

[_WaveRider_]

2 minutes ago, JCC45 said:

So you post your reasons why you like the rework and someone down votes you for your opinion.

And people wonder why they aren't being taken seriously.

That is what the emotes are for - whether a person agrees or disagrees.

Of course it would be nice to have a reason, but as TheCanadian says, it's the forum.

[Taylor3006]

4 minutes ago, JCC45 said:

So you post your reasons why you like the rework along with reasonable suggestions for improvementsand someone down votes you for your opinion.

And people wonder why they aren't being taken seriously.

Yes this has been happening with posts on both sides of the rework. 

 

4 minutes ago, xThecanadianx said:

eh it's just a  forum downvote.  no big loss

I never use the down votes, they are pointless unless I am responding to a moderator locking a thread. There is little else one can do at that point... 

[JCC45]

5 minutes ago, _WaveRider_ said:

That is what the emotes are for - whether a person agrees or disagrees.

Of course it would be nice to have a reason, but as TheCanadian says, it's the forum.

No... that is what words are for.  Emotes are the visual equivalent of "NO YOU".  Lazy and pointless.

 His post was thoughtful and reasoned but instead of offering a response in a similar tone someone just hits the "hate" button. 

If you disagree with his points then why not state which parts you disagree with and offer a rebuttal? 

[xTheCanadianx]

5 minutes ago, enderland07 said:

Try playing at TX with two average CVs on each team.

Then play at TX with one or two above average CVs on each team.

And, if you're really unlucky, play at TX with two unicums playing CVs on each team or just the enemy team.

 

I am 100% convinced the people who are in support of the rework have not played much at TX in 2-CV games (or even 1 CV games, for that matter). The continual presence of CVs has destroyed the meta and quickly will lead to the same problem that PTS had - not enough players to make a decision. 

 You see I have played with 4 cv's  (2 per team) multiple times

I will again state it has it's issues but for the love of god the world isnt falling,  a few tweaks it will be fine.  but if you feel you must move on,  no ones stopping you and I'm not saying that to be rude I'm just trying to be constructive here, though I do  occasionally like to toss a 30,000 gallon propane tank in the fire, I'd prefer this thread doesnt do that.

I do support it but I will fact check you that I do play multiple tx games with my cv's and will continue to do so.  

(and look up in the sky, I see the neg bombers)

[xTheCanadianx]

4 minutes ago, JCC45 said:

Not the point.  His post was thoughtful and reasoned but instead of offering a response in a similar tone someone just hits the "hate" button. 

If you disagree with his points then why not state which parts you disagree with and offer a rebuttal? 

at the end of the day this is the internet, the hopes for positive discourse and discussion went out the window a long time ago.

on a funnier note anyone remember when wg took the ability to neg vote away?

[kgh52]

9 minutes ago, JCC45 said:

So you post your reasons why you like the rework along with reasonable suggestions for improvementsand someone down votes you for your opinion.

And people wonder why they aren't being taken seriously.

I see nothing wrong with showing your disagreement with a down vote.

[kgh52]

4 minutes ago, xThecanadianx said:

at the end of the day this is the internet, the hopes for positive discourse and discussion went out the window a long time ago.

on a funnier note anyone remember when wg took the ability to neg vote away?

At this time I believe it is impossible to have a meaningful discussion on 8.0. The "angry meters" are pegged out. Hopefully in a few weeks the rage will ebb.

[xTheCanadianx]

6 minutes ago, kgh52 said:

I see nothing wrong with showing your disagreement with a down vote.

Agreed, tbh I'd prefer that over some remarks I have seen in other threads.

[xTheCanadianx]

2 minutes ago, kgh52 said:

At this time I believe it is impossible to have a meaningful discussion on 8.0. The "angry meters" are pegged out. Hopefully in a few weeks the rage will ebb.

well the other day mine  was screaming abandon ship, so I felt I'd let the dust settle a few days before posting.

 

[Ducky_shot]

Wait, you are complaining that aa is too strong and too weak in the same post???? Wow... 

[xTheCanadianx]

Just now, Ducky_shot said:

Wait, you are complaining that aa is too strong and too weak in the same post???? Wow... 

Yes, in some spots it needs buffed, in others it needs nerfed, it just doesnt feel consistent tbh.  as well I do see the reasoning in this on the other side of the coin, encouraging team play.  But hey some forget the part of these games is Team play who knew.

AA in groups should always be a death bubble, solo ships should have the teeth to say approach me if you dare but tell me in history where one ship with out support solo'd waves and waves planes.  Hell the Mariana's turkey shoot was a result of grouped AA.

 

[DrHolmes52]

1 minute ago, Ducky_shot said:

Wait, you are complaining that aa is too strong and too weak in the same post???? Wow... 

Remember, this is WoWs.  Reality is left at the door.

With so many ships, it is definitely possible for both to be the case.

[Ducky_shot]

2 minutes ago, xThecanadianx said:

Yes, in some spots it needs buffed, in others it needs nerfed, it just doesnt feel consistent tbh.  as well I do see the reasoning in this on the other side of the coin, encouraging team play.  But hey some forget the part of these games is Team play who knew.

AA in groups should always be a death bubble, solo ships should have the teeth to say approach me if you dare but tell me in history where one ship with out support solo'd waves and waves planes.  Hell the Mariana's turkey shoot was a result of grouped AA.

 

It seems like the complaints I see is that playing cv it seems like the complaint is that the aa is too strong but when playing specific surface ships people complain its too weak as the aa rework has them playing differently. 

[xTheCanadianx]

2 minutes ago, DrHolmes52 said:

Remember, this is WoWs.  Reality is left at the door.

With so many ships, it is definitely possible for both to be the case.

And this is exactly what I am getting at.  tbh my blunt assessment for most of the hate is that the old RTS CV was superior when played in the right hands and unstoppable with the balance tipped to that players favor.

Now the playing feild is even as it should be and their mad.    TBH this is something that should have been done when wg changed out the camera views of artillery ships back in alpha,  after realizing the same issues with their top down view. 

[kgh52]

2 minutes ago, xThecanadianx said:

well the other day mine  was screaming abandon ship, so I felt I'd let the dust settle a few days before posting.

I think it going to take more than a few days. I've played a few coops but mostly Narai since 8.0. I'm staying out of the fray.

[xTheCanadianx]

6 minutes ago, Ducky_shot said:

It seems like the complaints I see is that playing cv it seems like the complaint is that the aa is too strong but when playing specific surface ships people complain its too weak as the aa rework has them playing differently. 

from the cv perspective, and it might be my understanding of history too, but  American Bb's are alot more vulnerable to plane attacks then they should be,  hell with all the 5' 38's on alabama that aa should be stronger, hell when kebob attacked my missouri the other day I felt it was weak.

I have noticed attacking a group of ships with planes, thats just like sticking your hand into a hornets nest, your gonna get stung as it should be, but some ships solo can barely manage to kill a plane, and thats where I'm saying some arent as strong as they should be, but solo ships should not be god teir aa either

[Ramsalot]

45 minutes ago, EvelAye said:

I untied my Ryuko port queen and played 2 co-op games yesterday. Didn't enjoy it. Actually think I liked the old style better. If they removed CV's from the game altogether, I wouldn't miss them. At the dock she will stay.

On the first day of the patch I took both Kaga and Saipan to co-op.  First 10 matches were utterly horrible, I basically could not hit much, would end up on the bottom of the list, and struggle to make any difference.  There is learning curve involved.  After some practice I starting topping the list and getting multiple kills.

[Ramsalot]

15 minutes ago, Ducky_shot said:

Wait, you are complaining that aa is too strong and too weak in the same post???? Wow... 

AA feels inconsistent only because CV players can do something about it.  I know AA ranges on T10 CLs, and I also have captain skill that tells me how many defensive AA has been activated around my squadron.  If I see that number jump up, even before I see Minotaur in smoke, I just automatically boost the engines and dodge hard to one side, and miss murderous wall of flak.  You can also drastically reduce plane speed to avoid flak while maneuvering.  All that will allow you to zip around finding weaknesses in AA screen.  Player that flies his squadron through the flak will get entire squadron murdered in one go and complain that AA is too strong.

[Kami]

Hello Captains,

We appreciate the feedback and you telling us your in-game experiences =).

Keep at it!