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

My suggestion to fix CV damage imbalance, 'F' exploit and AA design issues.

14 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Beta Testers
1,479 posts

WG,

The CV rework has an issue with the damage output potential of carriers... it essentially is too low under tier 10 and too strong at tier 10...and does not scale properly as you tier up. Then the AA damage of ships is made so that its either ridiculously effective or completely useless. 

 

CV damage output issue:

@ Tier 4 and 6 they do weak damage because their planes are delivering only 2 torpedoes per attack run..2 attack planes, 1 torp each (with low hit rates on top of that but thats ok because its due to targets actively avoiding which is GOOD and balanced). The dive bombers fare a little better in hit rate but their damage output is still low compared to a single DD firing its guns on target twice. 

Tier 8 the CVs are still using 2 planes per attack run (Kaga excluded) and their torps and bombs do a bit more damage but this damage does not scale to the HP/armor/torp belt increase ships receive as they tier up.

@ Tier 10 things go crazy. CV's suddenly are given quadruple damage and larger, more survivable attack squadrons.  

 

Solution:

Torpedo Planes:

Kaga is the one CV that is ALMOST well balanced at tier 8..and it serves as a good example of how to make the other CVs in all tiers work so that they can be a functional member of the team WITHOUT being the one, untouchable and unstoppable dominant ship.  

What makes Kaga different? To begin with, it has more attack planes per attack run AND its torpedoes do LOWER damage than the tier 8 cv (7000 something vs 5000 something in Kaga)... so while the tier 8 cv has 14k~ output with 2 torps, Kaga has 20k output with its 4 torps. At tier 8 that is the equivalent of 2 BB citadels upon another BB IF there was zero torpedo damage reduction and IF all 4 torps hit. 

That being said, 2 citadel hits equivalent damage delivered from a carrier that cannot be hurt and who is at zero risk of running out of aircraft and who can save most of his planes by pressing F right after dropping the first torps... means that is too much damage for this ship to have. 

BUT... the fact that the carrier has more aircraft per attack run and more torpedoes in the water is the key point here. Torpedoes miss and can be dodged... much more so now than with the previous CV mechanics. 

So the solution I offer is simple: Increase the number of planes per attack run AND reduce the damage of each torpedo so that the total damage is equivalent to ONE citadel from a BB AP. 

How to do it: 

- Give each attack squadron a set number of attack planes per attack run based on the level of your ship divided by 2. Tier 4 has 2 attack planes, tier 6 has 3, 8 has 4, 10 has 5. 

- Torpedo damage should be the highest AP BB (damage rounded up) of carrier's tier divided by the number of attack planes. Aka at tier 10 I think the highest BB AP damage is Yamato at 14.8k ... so torps should be (15k / 5) = 3k per torpedo. This means the Tier 10 CV would have a damage output of 15k before any torpedo bulge mitigation IF all 5 torps connect and there was no torp bulge. 

This damage output makes the CV as damaging as a single BB citadel if all hits connect... which is fair and balanced as the carrier has the option of returning for another attack run or using a different attack squadron type. The increased number of torpedoes increases the chances of flood and hit rate but at the same time the decrease in damage per torpedo reduces the overall damage due to damage mitigation factors. Furthermore, it makes damage rates be consistent no matter what tier you are in. The only thing you gain at higher tiers is more chances to hit (for less damage per torp) and more flood chances. 

OF COURSE, these changes will also require a re-adjustment to plane recovery times.

 

Dive Bombers: 

I feel they are almost good and balanced as they are now. The only things I'd change are: 

- The absurd 'climb before the dive' thing. Dive bombers don't do that. They wing over and dive.

- Less RNG dispersion and more player skill... the bombs should drop relative to the center of the aimpoint to where the dive bomber is located in the dive/flight during the dive when bomb was released. 

 

Rocket Fighters:

What I would change of these is the attack itself. Rocket attacks are done at a shallow dive angle not at ground level (thats suicidal). 

- When initiating the attack, the fighter will begin a shallow dive and the aimpoint will have less distance to aim at the longer the plane is diving..aka the aim point will drift towards the fighter plane. At 0 seconds attack timer the aimpoint is very close to the fighter. 

 

AA issues: 

AA was implemented poorly. That is the nicest way I can put it. Its absurd to see a Shimakaze AA obliterate an entire squadron in one puff given its not even an AA strong ship..likewise its silly to see an AA strong ship be unable to shoot down a single plane as an attack squadron dives in on it. This is caused by the design still using the 'damage aura' and 'RNG puffs of death'. Then we have the problem of ships having 'kill it all' AA consumable ..which is a little OP no matter what ship has it. Then we have prohibitive timers on sector reinforcement. 

I suggest AA be reworked to be more hands-on and reflective of each ship's AA strengths. 

- Have AA FLAK puffs be 1 per gun mount capable of firing that caliber of AA. Reduce flak puff damage by 50% from current. 

- Sector reinforcement needs to be changed to a 10 second re-use timer with a 4 second activation timer. On all ships as baseline. Cruisers and AA specific ships (like AA destroyers) have this reduced to 8 seconds re-use/2 second activation. 

Note: Sector reinforcement changes literally returns the AA flak puff damage to current levels IF the player has reinforced that area. This is part of the more 'hands on' AA gameplay. 

- Remove AA consumable. Replace with unlimited use, 80 second re-use timer that for 10 seconds increases all medium and long AA range by +2km.  This will turn this ability into one that enables ships to support others farther away vs aircraft. Also, ADD THIS OPTION as a LIMITED USE CONSUMABLE on non-AA ships (aka ships that currently dont have AA consumable).

- Replace damage aura and replace with the same system FLAK AA has... just show the weapon animation as the bullet streams being fired towards the planes. Instead of a flak puff (which literally is designated a point in space where if a plane is there it takes damage) you would see your planes getting shot down by bullets. As an extra cool thing, the bullets could be seen flying past your camera viewpoint too. 

- Refire rate for medium and short range AA should be increased accordingly to compensate for the potential loss of damage vs the current aura damage. 

This last change makes hitting with AA and dodging AA to be part of the flying the plane experience as well as part of the management of the AA of your ship experience.   

 

Finally: Change to the 'F' return system. Currently it is exploitable by releasing the planes just after the weapons are dropped thus saving them from damage from what would have been exiting the AA screen. This is wrong. 

The change to fix this is simple: If your squadron is under attack by AA or fighters, it cannot return. Simple as that. You have to fly out of the AA or out of fighter range to be able to press F. 

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
208
[INR]
Members
655 posts
3,734 battles
10 minutes ago, Skyfaller said:

-  Have AA FLAK puffs be 1 per gun mount capable of firing that caliber of AA. Reduce flak puff damage by 50% from current. 

- Sector reinforcement needs to be changed to a 10 second re-use timer with a 4 second activation timer. On all ships as baseline. Cruisers and AA specific ships (like AA destroyers) have this reduced to 8 seconds re-use/2 second activation. 

Note: Sector reinforcement changes literally returns the AA flak puff damage to current levels IF the player has reinforced that area. This is part of the more 'hands on' AA gameplay. 

- Remove AA consumable. Replace with unlimited use, 80 second re-use timer that for 10 seconds increases all medium and long AA range by +2km.  This will turn this ability into one that enables ships to support others farther away vs aircraft. Also, ADD THIS OPTION as a LIMITED USE CONSUMABLE on non-AA ships (aka ships that currently dont have AA consumable).

- Replace damage aura and replace with the same system FLAK AA has... just show the weapon animation as the bullet streams being fired towards the planes. Instead of a flak puff (which literally is designated a point in space where if a plane is there it takes damage) you would see your planes getting shot down by bullets. As an extra cool thing, the bullets could be seen flying past your camera viewpoint too. 

- Refire rate for medium and short range AA should be increased accordingly to compensate for the potential loss of damage vs the current aura damage. 

This last change makes hitting with AA and dodging AA to be part of the flying the plane experience as well as part of the management of the AA of your ship experience.   

I'm gonna have to hard pass on all of these ideas. The last thing we need is more RNG in our AA, and introducing a cooldown to sector management is the last thing I want. I'm fine with an 8-10 second sector change on a CL/CA and prefer it to whatever it is you're suggesting. 

Edited by WuYixiang

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
848
[OPRAH]
Beta Testers
4,473 posts
14,393 battles

So here we see another suggested fix for the unneeded fix that has been foisted upon us because of those who demanded an unnecessary fix to an imagined problem that now has put us all in fix that wouldn't be needed if those crying for an unneeded fix had just been ignored and told to fix it themselves by learning how to play a CV or counter a CV! The fix is! There's more than one way to fix your little red wagon. There now a roll of duct tape will fix anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,724
[RLGN]
Members
9,392 posts
18,778 battles

The proposed torpedo damage changes were REPEATEDLY suggested to be implemented in RTS, and said suggestions were ignored, or at the very least never publicly acknowledged.

WG would have been better off in the short term extending the no alt attacks to all tiers. This would have reduced the insta nuke ability of all carriers, and made getting hit more a matter of not paying attention, and a carrier player’s ability to use the existing tools for autodrops.

Add in reduced or increased damage as appropriate for bombers and AA, maybe even the fighter rockets, and see what happened.

At least then it wouldn’t seem like the old system was seemingly thrown out arbitrarily without any real effort to fix it, and players would be more accepting of the current changes, (ignoring the current Hak, AA, and F key controversy for this example.)

As it is, the changes have destroyed any enjoyment I had with carriers. Maybe I’m suffering from the reverse of what many did in relation to RTS. For me RTS was ‘easy,’ though my weaknesses using alt attacks limited me to Co-op and Ops; while for many others it wasn’t. Now many find the FPS ‘easy,’ but like the alt attacks in RTS, I find the dodging of AA and 100% manual attacks of the FPS extremely difficult to use, (even though I’m trying to follow suggestions given her in the forums.)

As much as I tried to avoid doing so before the update, it’s more fun now throwing my 19 point USN destroyer driver into a AA/DFAA Nicholas and trolling carriers. Escort has literally been the name of the game. Swatting flies and killing Red destroyers that think it’s cute to try to attack Green carriers.

All of the normal destroyer things I’ve also done have just been icing on a cake.

Edited by Estimated_Prophet
typos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
1,479 posts
36 minutes ago, Estimated_Prophet said:

The proposed torpedo damage changes were REPEATEDLY suggested to be implemented in RTS, and said suggestions were ignored, or at the very least never publicly acknowledged.

WG would have been better off in the short term extending the no alt attacks to all tiers. This would have reduced the insta nuke ability of all carriers, and made getting hit more a matter of not paying attention, and a carrier player’s ability to use the existing tools for autodrops.

Add in reduced or increased damage as appropriate for bombers and AA, maybe even the fighter rockets, and see what happened.

At least then it wouldn’t seem like the old system was seemingly thrown out arbitrarily without any real effort to fix it, and players would be more accepting of the current changes, (ignoring the current Hak, AA, and F key controversy for this example.)

As it is, the changes have destroyed any enjoyment I had with carriers. Maybe I’m suffering from the reverse of what many did in relation to RTS. For me RTS was ‘easy,’ though my weaknesses using alt attacks limited me to Co-op and Ops; while for many others it wasn’t. Now many find the FPS ‘easy,’ but like the alt attacks in RTS, I find the dodging of AA and 100% manual attacks of the FPS extremely difficult to use, (even though I’m trying to follow suggestions given her in the forums.)

As much as I tried to avoid doing so before the update, it’s more fun now throwing my 19 point USN destroyer driver into a AA/DFAA Nicholas and trolling carriers. Escort has literally been the name of the game. Swatting flies and killing Red destroyers that think it’s cute to try to attack Green carriers.

All of the normal destroyer things I’ve also done have just been icing on a cake.

Yeah but now we know why they were ignored. Even back then they knew they'd be turning the CV's into FPS so it could go along with their mobile game. Now that its here, the same changes are still needed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
305 posts
879 battles
35 minutes ago, Estimated_Prophet said:

Escort has literally been the name of the game.

Hilariously, EXACTLY what Destroyers of that era were purpose-built to do. 

 

My two cents here:

Start with doing completely away ANY periods of invulnerability or boosted speed, to include post-attack and when F is pressed. 

See what effect that has, THEN make more changes. If you just shotgun a bunch of nerfs and buffs at everything, then you won't know what the actual problem/solution was.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,724
[RLGN]
Members
9,392 posts
18,778 battles
17 minutes ago, BitPlayerCOH said:

Hilariously, EXACTLY what Destroyers of that era were purpose-built to do. 

My two cents here:

Start with doing completely away ANY periods of invulnerability or boosted speed, to include post-attack and when F is pressed. 

See what effect that has, THEN make more changes. If you just shotgun a bunch of nerfs and buffs at everything, then you won't know what the actual problem/solution was.

Actually wouldn’t mind that, since I prefer to attack with my carriers over running away. I’m not even that good of an attacker, but it’s depressing as hell to not even be able to get close to traditionally AA weak targets without getting creamed.

I would expect trouble from Nicholas, Farragut, or Yubari, even a tricked out Wyoming, but at least in the Wyoming’s case I used to at least be able to get a Langley or Hosho attack off without getting completely wiped out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
305 posts
879 battles

It would also be interesting to maybe make AA a little more involved for the defending player.  Maybe give them control of the large-caliber AA, let them aim the flak bursts... but also give the shells appropriate flight time, etc. 

 

For Destroyers and Cruisers with dual-purpose main batteries,  make it a toggled mode- In order to use their main batteries as part of the AA they have to actually stop shooting at boats to shoot at planes.

 

For Battleships and Cruisers with DP Secondaries, include the same toggle, only it just makes your DP secondaries ONLY fire at ships or ONLY fire at planes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,291
[PVE]
Members
7,194 posts
12,389 battles
5 hours ago, BitPlayerCOH said:

It would also be interesting to maybe make AA a little more involved for the defending player.  Maybe give them control of the large-caliber AA, let them aim the flak bursts... but also give the shells appropriate flight time, etc. 

 

For Destroyers and Cruisers with dual-purpose main batteries,  make it a toggled mode- In order to use their main batteries as part of the AA they have to actually stop shooting at boats to shoot at planes.

 

For Battleships and Cruisers with DP Secondaries, include the same toggle, only it just makes your DP secondaries ONLY fire at ships or ONLY fire at planes.

Oh lord no. With everything a player has to control now adding manually shooting AA is just too much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
305
[TBOW]
Members
1,510 posts
11,405 battles
14 hours ago, Skyfaller said:

WG,

The CV rework has an issue with the damage output potential of carriers... it essentially is too low under tier 10 and too strong at tier 10...and does not scale properly as you tier up. Then the AA damage of ships is made so that its either ridiculously effective or completely useless. 

 

CV damage output issue:

@ Tier 4 and 6 they do weak damage because their planes are delivering only 2 torpedoes per attack run..2 attack planes, 1 torp each (with low hit rates on top of that but thats ok because its due to targets actively avoiding which is GOOD and balanced). The dive bombers fare a little better in hit rate but their damage output is still low compared to a single DD firing its guns on target twice. 

Tier 8 the CVs are still using 2 planes per attack run (Kaga excluded) and their torps and bombs do a bit more damage but this damage does not scale to the HP/armor/torp belt increase ships receive as they tier up.

@ Tier 10 things go crazy. CV's suddenly are given quadruple damage and larger, more survivable attack squadrons.  

 

Solution:

Torpedo Planes:

Kaga is the one CV that is ALMOST well balanced at tier 8..and it serves as a good example of how to make the other CVs in all tiers work so that they can be a functional member of the team WITHOUT being the one, untouchable and unstoppable dominant ship.  

What makes Kaga different? To begin with, it has more attack planes per attack run AND its torpedoes do LOWER damage than the tier 8 cv (7000 something vs 5000 something in Kaga)... so while the tier 8 cv has 14k~ output with 2 torps, Kaga has 20k output with its 4 torps. At tier 8 that is the equivalent of 2 BB citadels upon another BB IF there was zero torpedo damage reduction and IF all 4 torps hit. 

That being said, 2 citadel hits equivalent damage delivered from a carrier that cannot be hurt and who is at zero risk of running out of aircraft and who can save most of his planes by pressing F right after dropping the first torps... means that is too much damage for this ship to have. 

BUT... the fact that the carrier has more aircraft per attack run and more torpedoes in the water is the key point here. Torpedoes miss and can be dodged... much more so now than with the previous CV mechanics. 

So the solution I offer is simple: Increase the number of planes per attack run AND reduce the damage of each torpedo so that the total damage is equivalent to ONE citadel from a BB AP. 

How to do it: 

- Give each attack squadron a set number of attack planes per attack run based on the level of your ship divided by 2. Tier 4 has 2 attack planes, tier 6 has 3, 8 has 4, 10 has 5. 

- Torpedo damage should be the highest AP BB (damage rounded up) of carrier's tier divided by the number of attack planes. Aka at tier 10 I think the highest BB AP damage is Yamato at 14.8k ... so torps should be (15k / 5) = 3k per torpedo. This means the Tier 10 CV would have a damage output of 15k before any torpedo bulge mitigation IF all 5 torps connect and there was no torp bulge. 

This damage output makes the CV as damaging as a single BB citadel if all hits connect... which is fair and balanced as the carrier has the option of returning for another attack run or using a different attack squadron type. The increased number of torpedoes increases the chances of flood and hit rate but at the same time the decrease in damage per torpedo reduces the overall damage due to damage mitigation factors. Furthermore, it makes damage rates be consistent no matter what tier you are in. The only thing you gain at higher tiers is more chances to hit (for less damage per torp) and more flood chances. 

OF COURSE, these changes will also require a re-adjustment to plane recovery times.

 

Dive Bombers: 

I feel they are almost good and balanced as they are now. The only things I'd change are: 

- The absurd 'climb before the dive' thing. Dive bombers don't do that. They wing over and dive.

- Less RNG dispersion and more player skill... the bombs should drop relative to the center of the aimpoint to where the dive bomber is located in the dive/flight during the dive when bomb was released. 

 

Rocket Fighters:

What I would change of these is the attack itself. Rocket attacks are done at a shallow dive angle not at ground level (thats suicidal). 

- When initiating the attack, the fighter will begin a shallow dive and the aimpoint will have less distance to aim at the longer the plane is diving..aka the aim point will drift towards the fighter plane. At 0 seconds attack timer the aimpoint is very close to the fighter. 

 

AA issues: 

AA was implemented poorly. That is the nicest way I can put it. Its absurd to see a Shimakaze AA obliterate an entire squadron in one puff given its not even an AA strong ship..likewise its silly to see an AA strong ship be unable to shoot down a single plane as an attack squadron dives in on it. This is caused by the design still using the 'damage aura' and 'RNG puffs of death'. Then we have the problem of ships having 'kill it all' AA consumable ..which is a little OP no matter what ship has it. Then we have prohibitive timers on sector reinforcement. 

I suggest AA be reworked to be more hands-on and reflective of each ship's AA strengths. 

- Have AA FLAK puffs be 1 per gun mount capable of firing that caliber of AA. Reduce flak puff damage by 50% from current. 

- Sector reinforcement needs to be changed to a 10 second re-use timer with a 4 second activation timer. On all ships as baseline. Cruisers and AA specific ships (like AA destroyers) have this reduced to 8 seconds re-use/2 second activation. 

Note: Sector reinforcement changes literally returns the AA flak puff damage to current levels IF the player has reinforced that area. This is part of the more 'hands on' AA gameplay. 

- Remove AA consumable. Replace with unlimited use, 80 second re-use timer that for 10 seconds increases all medium and long AA range by +2km.  This will turn this ability into one that enables ships to support others farther away vs aircraft. Also, ADD THIS OPTION as a LIMITED USE CONSUMABLE on non-AA ships (aka ships that currently dont have AA consumable).

- Replace damage aura and replace with the same system FLAK AA has... just show the weapon animation as the bullet streams being fired towards the planes. Instead of a flak puff (which literally is designated a point in space where if a plane is there it takes damage) you would see your planes getting shot down by bullets. As an extra cool thing, the bullets could be seen flying past your camera viewpoint too. 

- Refire rate for medium and short range AA should be increased accordingly to compensate for the potential loss of damage vs the current aura damage. 

This last change makes hitting with AA and dodging AA to be part of the flying the plane experience as well as part of the management of the AA of your ship experience.   

 

Finally: Change to the 'F' return system. Currently it is exploitable by releasing the planes just after the weapons are dropped thus saving them from damage from what would have been exiting the AA screen. This is wrong. 

The change to fix this is simple: If your squadron is under attack by AA or fighters, it cannot return. Simple as that. You have to fly out of the AA or out of fighter range to be able to press F. 

Your torpedo Solution is interesting, but a Yammy also can fling 9 shells at you with pretty decent accuracy at 1 time.  Doing a lot of damage in one salvo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
1,479 posts
18 hours ago, WuYixiang said:

I'm gonna have to hard pass on all of these ideas. The last thing we need is more RNG in our AA, and introducing a cooldown to sector management is the last thing I want. I'm fine with an 8-10 second sector change on a CL/CA and prefer it to whatever it is you're suggesting. 

You don't seem to understand how it would work in my suggestion.

The key thing is that every flak caliber gun produces 1 flak burst. Currently this is not the case.. in application 1 flak burst per gun would result in each ship having roughly 20% more flak bursts than they currently have.... but they'd be 50% less powerful than they are now. It is only if they have the sector reinforcement activated to where the planes are coming in at that the flak will be at full strength per burst. Hence the 'RNG' gets modified by player input. 

Since there can be no manual AA aiming then you will always be slave to either RNG or to aura damage...and aura damage is outright dumb imo. 

Bullet AA also gets a buff when reinforced and it will also be RNG based... but unlike flak, it has a high refire rate. If the CV player does not maneuver then his planes will get wrecked quick. 

Of course, there would be a need to have some kind of visual in the flak/AA to indicate if the ship is firing on you with reinforced AA... maybe excessive amounts of tracers and/or different color smoke flak puffs (non-reinforced would be light grey, reinforced would be black?).

Sector management is fast on cruisers.. the re-use timer is of no consequence given most CVs wont come for a 2nd pass and if they do your ship essentially has a lot of time to turn hull to have your reinforced sector to face the incoming planes (even a BB). 

Finally, the consumable adds 2km range to the flak... which gives you more time to weaken the CV squadrons ...and the consumable is unlimited uses on AA centric ships and limited use on non-AA centric ships. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
208
[INR]
Members
655 posts
3,734 battles
11 minutes ago, Skyfaller said:

You don't seem to understand how it would work in my suggestion.

The key thing is that every flak caliber gun produces 1 flak burst. Currently this is not the case.. in application 1 flak burst per gun would result in each ship having roughly 20% more flak bursts than they currently have.... but they'd be 50% less powerful than they are now. It is only if they have the sector reinforcement activated to where the planes are coming in at that the flak will be at full strength per burst. Hence the 'RNG' gets modified by player input. 

Since there can be no manual AA aiming then you will always be slave to either RNG or to aura damage...and aura damage is outright dumb imo. 

Bullet AA also gets a buff when reinforced and it will also be RNG based... but unlike flak, it has a high refire rate. If the CV player does not maneuver then his planes will get wrecked quick. 

Of course, there would be a need to have some kind of visual in the flak/AA to indicate if the ship is firing on you with reinforced AA... maybe excessive amounts of tracers and/or different color smoke flak puffs (non-reinforced would be light grey, reinforced would be black?).

Sector management is fast on cruisers.. the re-use timer is of no consequence given most CVs wont come for a 2nd pass and if they do your ship essentially has a lot of time to turn hull to have your reinforced sector to face the incoming planes (even a BB). 

Finally, the consumable adds 2km range to the flak... which gives you more time to weaken the CV squadrons ...and the consumable is unlimited uses on AA centric ships and limited use on non-AA centric ships. 

Even after your explanation, a heck to the no.

Sector switching on CAs is fast, yes, but being penalized for switching sectors while being attacked is farcical at best. What happens when a second or third CV decides to focus you, but you've already initiated sector change? You'd have to wait 10 seconds and then the change time to reset your AA to 100/100, by which time you've probably already been cross-torped by multiple squadrons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
1,479 posts

you TURN your ship how about that? 10 seconds is minimum needed so your ship just doesnt spew boosted AA damage in all directions at your whim. Its about player input and skill. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
305 posts
879 battles
On 2/6/2019 at 5:33 AM, AdmiralThunder said:

Oh lord no. With everything a player has to control now adding manually shooting AA is just too much.

Just tossing ideas.  If you keep it hands off, people gripe.  If you make it too hands-on people gripe.  No solution will satisfy the whole playerbase.  

 

The hotfix adjusted some things, but maybe shotgunned too much at once. 

 

Also, I wonder how much DD mains would scream if WG gave carrier drivers manual control of their large caliber DP secondaries for ship-to-ship defense.  They (USN carriers at least) have an awful-lot of 5-inch mounts, heh. 

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.

×