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

About the "CV spotting nerfs being tested"

47 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Beta Testers
671 posts
2,548 battles

Now, some people have been taking it the wrong way, it's not like CV's will put on sunglasses and walk around with a stick...it's actually a dog.

 

The proposals varies but one of them is that ships with AA turned off won't be detected by planes until they pop up their AA...oh well...yeah it's really bad, BUT.

The 4 propositions in the topic: 

1 will probably never be implemented since it'll kill CV gameplay, making it rely for teammates to EVERYTHING.

 

The other 3 states that if the AA is off, ships will be not detected for some time until it goes back to what we have now over the course of the game, and those are the things being mentioned here.

 

Those ships will probably still be detected by surface ships, so as soon as they're detected, you drop your payload on the enemy...and they don't retaliate...and if they do retaliate, they just lost their concealment buff for the rest of the game, BBs will probably suffer from this if they're being escorted by cruisers and DDs because those might not want to be spotted yet and keep their AA off while BBs have gigantic detectability range.

 

Now, is it bad? Sure, this means that island campers can stay behind islands and never be spotted by CV (even though we'll prob be able to see the gunfire, like in smoke), but this also means that CVs will be more like a BB, only firing at targets other spots until they decide to retaliate your planes.

 

What can be inquired from those changes is:

  • The number of torpedo boats will increase
  • The number of DDs hunting CVs might increase
  • The number of flanker ships such as Zao will increase
  • Ship's with low AA power will increase
  • The hate for CVs not "spotting" a DD will increase
  • BBs will be more focused
  • Airplane survivability might increase against island campers who prioritize their safety over their team's

 

At first I was like everyone here, thinking that those changes would completely break CVs, but then I thought things over again and looking at this, it's not that bad, sure, we'll lose the spotter role against some ships but we'll also start to deal damage with less retaliation (if the enemy decides that their AA concealment is more important than their team's safety).

 

This last part, we attacking without receiving retaliation, might be another thing that players will start complaining, but then they'll have to remember that THEY were the ones that suggested the changes on detectability and that THEY have the power to either go stealth or support teammates.

 

Now, this only applies if the changes to detectability happens like the way it's stated, ships lose their concealment buff against planes when they turn their AA on and over the course of the match, otherwise situations where there is only a CV on the enemy side and he can't do a thing will also rise, and no one wants to play a game where you can't fire your guns until the enemy is right in your face...specially when you can't deal the same amount of damage than any other ship in the game.

 

If those changes passes...CVs be like

image.jpeg.921a700ce786f023c9685001008963b0.jpeg

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
365
[SIM]
Members
1,650 posts

New CV rework is bad. Having 2 CV in the game is [edited]STUPID. Go back to the old CV or just [edited]remove CV from the game.

  • Cool 10
  • Meh 10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
671 posts
2,548 battles
20 minutes ago, LadyJess said:

New CV rework is bad. Having 2 CV in the game is [edited]STUPID. Go back to the old CV or just [edited]remove CV from the game.

Don't know if trolling or being honest at heart

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,765
[WOLF2]
Beta Testers
6,719 posts
12,636 battles
5 minutes ago, ALROCHA said:

Don't know if trolling or being honest at heart

The fact that they use such an unreadable font kinda answers the question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,552
[RKLES]
[RKLES]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
5,994 posts
20,694 battles

You do not lose your concealment buff for the rest of the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
798
[HELLS]
Members
2,663 posts
27,182 battles
49 minutes ago, LadyJess said:

New CV rework is bad. Having 2 CV in the game is [edited]STUPID. Go back to the old CV or just [edited]remove CV from the game.

TROLL!!! 3 times in different posts...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
671 posts
2,548 battles
1 minute ago, dEsTurbed1 said:

You do not lose your concealment buff for the rest of the game.

There are 4 changes that are being tested right now, they don't lose the concealment buff for the rest of the game but some of them implies that at 10min mark it goes back to normal, which is basically the time where both teams are well distributed/already spotted.

From the 4 changes, only 1 and 2 should never be implemented.

22 minutes ago, HazardDrake said:

The fact that they use such an unreadable font kinda answers the question.

Again, not sure if troll or honest AT HEART.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,310
[MUDDX]
Beta Testers
8,144 posts
22,441 battles

not being spotted due to AA turned off has been in the game for quite a while.

Lady Jess is right. The CV rework has been garbage since 0.8.0 and it is getting stinkier with every update.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,846
[GWG]
[GWG]
Supertester
26,430 posts
14,165 battles
56 minutes ago, LadyJess said:

New CV rework is bad. Having 2 CV in the game is [edited]STUPID. Go back to the old CV or just [edited]remove CV from the game.

 

35 minutes ago, ALROCHA said:

Don't know if trolling or being honest at heart

I will go with trolling for the font they chose and honest for the answer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,465
Members
6,152 posts
9,801 battles

AA off = invisible to CVs?

Which essentially means CV now has to wait for team to do the spotting?

Concealment builds will remain the only meta then. Anyone not running it will be focused more. Also, it means CV class will be limited to where there's already fighting--and in matches where one team's down to their CVs, they're not gonna be able to defend themselves until ship hull's detected.

Can get behind it provided all CV sorties rendered accurate and fast-aiming. If we can't see you fine, but then we need fast reaction and aiming times so we can be useful as damage-dealers on the team.

Would be wiser of WG to revert all CVs to 0.8.0 and improve the AA build. AFT should simply increase AA range (and aerial detectability of all cruisers to prevent stealth AA), slot 6's AA module should have option to add 15% all AA damage or +4 flak clouds.

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
417
[STURM]
Members
708 posts
5,744 battles

Keep in mind, guys, it's very unlikely that these particular changes will be anything like what we eventually get. These are wacky, extreme scenarios that throw balance out the window to collect data.

Any changes that get to the live server will likely be much more subtle, but be based on the data collected. Heck, they might not even make changes. (I hope they do, though. I consider spotting to be the third biggest problem with the rework, after the binary nature of AA defense and the lack of communication from WG.)

In the meantime, though, I'll actually play on the test server to observe some of the hilarious outcomes this will produce.

9:59 minutes into the game: "Hmm... been flying around for a bit, and I haven't seen anything over here."

10:00 minutes into the game: "Oh, I was directly over a Minotaur and Wooster with thier AA off. I guess I'll just die."

 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,916
[FOXEH]
Beta Testers
14,105 posts
19,206 battles
1 hour ago, GrandAdmiral_2016 said:

TROLL!!! 3 times in different posts...

So .... how would you know if he was a troll, unless you were in all three posts too?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,846
[GWG]
[GWG]
Supertester
26,430 posts
14,165 battles
53 minutes ago, Reymu said:

AA off = invisible to CVs?

Which essentially means CV now has to wait for team to do the spotting?

Concealment builds will remain the only meta then. Anyone not running it will be focused more. Also, it means CV class will be limited to where there's already fighting--and in matches where one team's down to their CVs, they're not gonna be able to defend themselves until ship hull's detected.

Can get behind it provided all CV sorties rendered accurate and fast-aiming. If we can't see you fine, but then we need fast reaction and aiming times so we can be useful as damage-dealers on the team.

Would be wiser of WG to revert all CVs to 0.8.0 and improve the AA build. AFT should simply increase AA range (and aerial detectability of all cruisers to prevent stealth AA), slot 6's AA module should have option to add 15% all AA damage or +4 flak clouds.

I don't understand why they were testing those particular things as there is zero chance of them being instituted as they all are extremely open to abuse, particularly the ships with strong and very strong AA. AA off and wait until the planes are well into your AA and then turn your AA on and blap them.

  • Cool 2
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
460
[JMMAF]
Members
456 posts
8,161 battles
2 hours ago, ALROCHA said:

Now, some people have been taking it the wrong way, it's not like CV's will put on sunglasses and walk around with a stick...it's actually a dog.

 

The proposals varies but one of them is that ships with AA turned off won't be detected by planes until they pop up their AA...oh well...yeah it's really bad, BUT.

The 4 propositions in the topic: 

1 will probably never be implemented since it'll kill CV gameplay, making it rely for teammates to EVERYTHING.

 

The other 3 states that if the AA is off, ships will be not detected for some time until it goes back to what we have now over the course of the game, and those are the things being mentioned here.

 

Those ships will probably still be detected by surface ships, so as soon as they're detected, you drop your payload on the enemy...and they don't retaliate...and if they do retaliate, they just lost their concealment buff for the rest of the game, BBs will probably suffer from this if they're being escorted by cruisers and DDs because those might not want to be spotted yet and keep their AA off while BBs have gigantic detectability range.

 

Now, is it bad? Sure, this means that island campers can stay behind islands and never be spotted by CV (even though we'll prob be able to see the gunfire, like in smoke), but this also means that CVs will be more like a BB, only firing at targets other spots until they decide to retaliate your planes.

 

What can be inquired from those changes is:

  • The number of torpedo boats will increase
  • The number of DDs hunting CVs might increase
  • The number of flanker ships such as Zao will increase
  • Ship's with low AA power will increase
  • The hate for CVs not "spotting" a DD will increase
  • BBs will be more focused
  • Airplane survivability might increase against island campers who prioritize their safety over their team's

 

At first I was like everyone here, thinking that those changes would completely break CVs, but then I thought things over again and looking at this, it's not that bad, sure, we'll lose the spotter role against some ships but we'll also start to deal damage with less retaliation (if the enemy decides that their AA concealment is more important than their team's safety).

 

This last part, we attacking without receiving retaliation, might be another thing that players will start complaining, but then they'll have to remember that THEY were the ones that suggested the changes on detectability and that THEY have the power to either go stealth or support teammates.

 

Now, this only applies if the changes to detectability happens like the way it's stated, ships lose their concealment buff against planes when they turn their AA on and over the course of the match, otherwise situations where there is only a CV on the enemy side and he can't do a thing will also rise, and no one wants to play a game where you can't fire your guns until the enemy is right in your face...specially when you can't deal the same amount of damage than any other ship in the game.

 

If those changes passes...CVs be like

image.jpeg.921a700ce786f023c9685001008963b0.jpeg

ZERO problems with this.  Hopefully it goes through.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,007
[RLGN]
Members
14,303 posts
25,241 battles
2 hours ago, LadyJess said:

New CV rework is bad. Having 2 CV in the game is [edited]STUPID. Go back to the old CV or just [edited]remove CV from the game.

 

2 hours ago, ALROCHA said:

Don't know if trolling or being honest at heart

Okay then; how about an answer from someone who's been playing carriers since 2016, who is now playing the new carriers and is constantly getting better at them;

WG can take this pile of bovine byproducts of a rework and send it to a gulag where it belongs.

I didn't support this pile of garbage during the testing phase, I haven't supported this poorly tended compost heap over the last five months worth of 'tweaking,' and I doubt I'll think positively of this locker room hamper of sweaty used socks of a rework anytime in the near future.

1 hour ago, CAPTMUDDXX said:

Lady Jess is right. The CV rework has been garbage since 0.8.0 and it is getting stinkier with every update.

Because of a few recent experience I'm now better understanding some of the complaints over the past months; I'd sooner see carriers GONE, than see this stupidity continue.

  • Cool 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
202
[-K-]
Alpha Tester
453 posts
12,057 battles
15 hours ago, BrushWolf said:

I don't understand why they were testing those particular things as there is zero chance of them being instituted as they all are extremely open to abuse, particularly the ships with strong and very strong AA. AA off and wait until the planes are well into your AA and then turn your AA on and blap them.

Let's say that hypothetically you're the developer of a historically inspired boats-shaped arcade game. You are trying to balance your game and one of the most common complaints leveled against carriers is that their spotting abilities are oppressive to the rest of the ships. You want to test this out to determine what, if any, effect CV spotting has on the game and whether or not it's early spotting versus all spotting that is the problem. What, do you imagine, an experiment to gather such data might look like?

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,103
[SOV]
Members
4,621 posts
17 hours ago, ALROCHA said:

Now, some people have been taking it the wrong way, it's not like CV's will put on sunglasses and walk around with a stick...it's actually a dog.

 

The proposals varies but one of them is that ships with AA turned off won't be detected by planes until they pop up their AA...oh well...yeah it's really bad, BUT.

The 4 propositions in the topic: 

1 will probably never be implemented since it'll kill CV gameplay, making it rely for teammates to EVERYTHING.

 

The other 3 states that if the AA is off, ships will be not detected for some time until it goes back to what we have now over the course of the game, and those are the things being mentioned here.

 

Those ships will probably still be detected by surface ships, so as soon as they're detected, you drop your payload on the enemy...and they don't retaliate...and if they do retaliate, they just lost their concealment buff for the rest of the game, BBs will probably suffer from this if they're being escorted by cruisers and DDs because those might not want to be spotted yet and keep their AA off while BBs have gigantic detectability range.

 

Now, is it bad? Sure, this means that island campers can stay behind islands and never be spotted by CV (even though we'll prob be able to see the gunfire, like in smoke), but this also means that CVs will be more like a BB, only firing at targets other spots until they decide to retaliate your planes.

 

What can be inquired from those changes is:

  • The number of torpedo boats will increase
  • The number of DDs hunting CVs might increase
  • The number of flanker ships such as Zao will increase
  • Ship's with low AA power will increase
  • The hate for CVs not "spotting" a DD will increase
  • BBs will be more focused
  • Airplane survivability might increase against island campers who prioritize their safety over their team's

 

At first I was like everyone here, thinking that those changes would completely break CVs, but then I thought things over again and looking at this, it's not that bad, sure, we'll lose the spotter role against some ships but we'll also start to deal damage with less retaliation (if the enemy decides that their AA concealment is more important than their team's safety).

 

This last part, we attacking without receiving retaliation, might be another thing that players will start complaining, but then they'll have to remember that THEY were the ones that suggested the changes on detectability and that THEY have the power to either go stealth or support teammates.

 

Now, this only applies if the changes to detectability happens like the way it's stated, ships lose their concealment buff against planes when they turn their AA on and over the course of the match, otherwise situations where there is only a CV on the enemy side and he can't do a thing will also rise, and no one wants to play a game where you can't fire your guns until the enemy is right in your face...specially when you can't deal the same amount of damage than any other ship in the game.

 

If those changes passes...CVs be like

image.jpeg.921a700ce786f023c9685001008963b0.jpeg

These are the bumbest ideas of all time. Games without cv suck. Bb in the back crusier behind islands you can shoot at. Its boring.

So make planes reliant on somone else to see is stupid. Add to it there is no alpha on planes.

Stealth fore was a bumb idea and it always will be.

None of these ideas should ever be implemented.

  • Boring 1
  • Meh 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,671
[POP]
Beta Testers
4,728 posts
6,987 battles

they are busy testing garbage proposals instead of adjusting the AA rework.  this is where your money spent on the game is going,to test irrelevant proposals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,305
Members
2,640 posts
4,263 battles

Maybe,  MAYBE five minutes in.   Ten minutes is a stupid length of time.  I honestly don't agree with the idea of not being able to start even at the beginning of the match but if they are going to insist on this stupidity then it can not be for literally half the match.  

But,  frankly speaking,  I think the entire idea is stupid and is just wrapping DD's in bubble wrap.  Again.  Its giving in to them going "But muh spotting!"  and "But uhm spotted!" and forcing everyone ELSE to adapt.  Again.  

  • Meh 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,846
[GWG]
[GWG]
Supertester
26,430 posts
14,165 battles
36 minutes ago, Dianeces said:

Let's say that hypothetically you're the developer of a historically inspired boats-shaped arcade game. You are trying to balance your game and one of the most common complaints leveled against carriers is that their spotting abilities are oppressive to the rest of the ships. You want to test this out to determine what, if any, effect CV spotting has on the game and whether or not it's early spotting versus all spotting that is the problem. What, do you imagine, an experiment to gather such data might look like?

The only way for a CV to keep a DD, this is where the majority of the complaining is coming from, constantly spotted is to be in their AA and any DD with dual purpose guns makes doing that impossible for very long. There are also a lot of cruisers that the CV player has to stay in their AA which is even less viable than with DD's. It is only possible to keep high detection cruisers and battleships continually spotted and they have to give up doing damage to do that.

22 minutes ago, Palladia said:

Maybe,  MAYBE five minutes in.   Ten minutes is a stupid length of time.  I honestly don't agree with the idea of not being able to start even at the beginning of the match but if they are going to insist on this stupidity then it can not be for literally half the match.  

But,  frankly speaking,  I think the entire idea is stupid and is just wrapping DD's in bubble wrap.  Again.  Its giving in to them going "But muh spotting!"  and "But uhm spotted!" and forcing everyone ELSE to adapt.  Again.  

I don't think there is any plan to implement any of those things and that this is more to mollify the DD Mafia.

  • Cool 1
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,010
[SBS]
Members
5,900 posts
54 minutes ago, Dianeces said:

Let's say that hypothetically you're the developer of a historically inspired boats-shaped arcade game. You are trying to balance your game and one of the most common complaints leveled against carriers is that their spotting abilities are oppressive to the rest of the ships. You want to test this out to determine what, if any, effect CV spotting has on the game and whether or not it's early spotting versus all spotting that is the problem. What, do you imagine, an experiment to gather such data might look like?

That's not what they want to test.  They know spotting is a problem, they know its a problem all match long.  The entire point of the rework was to shorten match length/reduce time to kill, and CVs removing concealment is how they were going to make that happen.  WG wants to test how much reducing CV spotting will increase match length/increase overall time to kill.  They aren't interested in balancing the game, they want to see how much making small adjustments to try placate the players will impact their goals for the rework.  If allowing surface ships to have less air spotting range early doesn't increase match length too much then WG might throw us a bone. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,103
[SOV]
Members
4,621 posts
1 hour ago, Dianeces said:

Let's say that hypothetically you're the developer of a historically inspired boats-shaped arcade game. You are trying to balance your game and one of the most common complaints leveled against carriers is that their spotting abilities are oppressive to the rest of the ships. You want to test this out to determine what, if any, effect CV spotting has on the game and whether or not it's early spotting versus all spotting that is the problem. What, do you imagine, an experiment to gather such data might look like?

Lets say you were a dev and you had one group of players that constaly complaned about everything. You would keep making changes for this group but they would always find somthing else to complane about.

When would you start to detest that group?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
475 posts
5,224 battles

They want data at extreme cases. 

It's often hard to draw conclusions on the impact of minor changes from the resulting data (maybe that small resultant change is just a meta shift?), so the objective here is to get big numbers from silly changes. 

 

For an example, I've seen a lot of good CVs start to focus DDs less since they have less damage to farm. That'd change the numbers, but it would obstruct whatever balance change they wnt to assess. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×