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

Why does WG protect CV players from their own stupidity and not DD players?

105 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

3,023
[SBS]
Members
5,908 posts

I saw this reference in one of Zoup's videos a week or two ago.  Can you provide a link to where this came from so we can understand the full context?  I'd hate to misunderstand what they mean from a lack of context.  I'm asking because the Zoup video said this was in reference to low tiers.

 

Edited by Slimeball91

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
145 posts
7,812 battles

I suspect that what WG has done for CVs is what used to be called, "Priming the Pump". They are trying to increase the number of CV players, while at the same time dial down the potential, Zap-your-Dead DDs. I just wish that they would finally get it figured out.  

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,129
Members
6,860 posts
15,357 battles
3 minutes ago, Slimeball91 said:

I saw this reference in one of Zoup's videos a week or two ago.  Can you provide a link to where this came from so we can understand the full context?  I'd hate to misunderstand what they mean from a lack of context.  I'm asking because the Zoup video said this was in reference to low tiers.

 

It's a quote from the cc discord. All I have is the screenshot as not a lot of people have access to it. 

Not sure of how much of the context may be NDA, but this quote is not NDA. But context does not matter because he is talking about dds dying, regardless of the cv/dd interaction. 

Edited by Ducky_shot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,023
[SBS]
Members
5,908 posts
6 minutes ago, Iron_Clad_5000 said:

I suspect that what WG has done for CVs is what used to be called, "Priming the Pump". They are trying to increase the number of CV players, while at the same time dial down the potential, Zap-your-Dead DDs. I just wish that they would finally get it figured out.  

I think you're about "Priming the Pump", another term might be stacking the deck in favor of their investment.  The problem I see is DDs were already the most aggressively counter ship type in the game.  Now we see a real drop in the DD population as a result of CVs, DD population has dropped from ~26% to just under 20% in the last few of months.

4 minutes ago, Ducky_shot said:

It's a quote from the cc discord. All I have is the screenshot as not a lot of people have access to it. 

Did you see anything more than just this screenshot, or know the full context of the comment?

Edited by Slimeball91

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,129
Members
6,860 posts
15,357 battles
Just now, Slimeball91 said:

I think you're about "Priming the Pump", another term might be stacking the deck in favor of their investment.  The problem I see is DDs were already the most aggressively counter ship type in the game.  Now we see a real drop in the DD population as a result of CVs, DD population has dropped from ~26% to just under 20% in the last few of months.

Did you see anything more than this just screenshot, or know the full context of the comment?

I gathered it was a general question from a CC about how WG felt cv/dd interaction was in regards to spotting and rockets. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,023
[SBS]
Members
5,908 posts
Just now, Ducky_shot said:

I gathered it was a general question from a CC about how WG felt cv/dd interaction was in regards to spotting and rockets. 

Boy, I really hope that isn't their position, because I don't think there has ever been a more broken interaction in this game than CV verses DDs.  

3 minutes ago, WernerHerzdog said:

I think this is the original source

Thanks a lot.  Taking Mejash at his word on the overall context, this is sad news for sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
896
[SYN]
[SYN]
Beta Testers
2,246 posts
12,682 battles

The protection of CVs is itself an implicit admission that the type is by far the most imbalanced one against other types. They need to keep the CV number balanced between the 2 teams since 1v0 will quickly tilt the board. They want to keep it from showing how dominating CV is against other ships by preventing heavily one-sided battle after one of the CV is lost early since both sides will suffer for the longest period.

Even with a extremely incompetent CV, their accidental spotting alone is still oppressively effective against other ships. Thus keeping them in match for as long as possible helps masking the type's build-in superiority over others.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,847
[NMKJT]
Beta Testers
24,800 posts
3,895 battles

To be perfectly honest, WG is far more likely to take what they gave to CVs and give it to battleships. Not destroyers.

  • Funny 2
  • Boring 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
145 posts
7,812 battles
4 minutes ago, Slimeball91 said:

I think you're about "Priming the Pump", another term might be stacking the deck in favor of their investment.  The problem I see is DDs were already the most aggressively counter ship type in the game.  Now we see a real drop in the DD population as a result of CVs, DD population has dropped from ~26% to just under 20% in the last few of months.

Did you see anything more than just this screenshot, or know the full context of the comment?

You are absolutely right, of course, but I suspect that a lot of the departed 6%, former DD players moved to Cruisers. I know that I did. although I do dust off a few of my favorite DDs from time to time. That said WG are apparently prepared to take the loss, as per their actions.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
326
[BB35]
[BB35]
Members
398 posts
11,076 battles

CVs need to be very vulnerable. The instant DCP and 5 second fires need to go away. CVs need to have BB length fires and be easily set. 

If a DD makes s mistake ... it gets punished.

If a cruiser goes broadside to a BB it gets punished.

If a carrier does something dumb... you cant punish it. 

 

Can I get a CV strip it of planes and put guns on its deck? Not only would I be immune to fire but Id have some mean AA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,759
[SALVO]
Members
2,020 posts
6,200 battles
1 minute ago, Iron_Clad_5000 said:

You are absolutely right, of course, but I suspect that a lot of the departed 6%, former DD players moved to Cruisers. I know that I did. although I do dust off a few of my favorite DDs from time to time. That said WG are apparently prepared to take the loss, as per their actions.    

Same here. DDs used to be my primary focus.  Now I play a lot more of a mixed bag of ships.  Which in a way is just my account progressing once i had all the major DDs except Kab unlocked.  I still main as DD CBs though where ofcourse I am free of CVs. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,023
[SBS]
Members
5,908 posts
2 minutes ago, Iron_Clad_5000 said:

You are absolutely right, of course, but I suspect that a lot of the departed 6%, former DD players moved to Cruisers. I know that I did. although I do dust off a few of my favorite DDs from time to time. That said WG are apparently prepared to take the loss, as per their actions.    

There is a small increase in CV games, and the rest of the 6% is split between BBs and cruisers.  I suspect this is due to an influx of new players that just stop playing DDs in low tiers due to the oppressive CV population down there.  Of course it doesn't help that the CV players have been learning to play over the last year and getting better in the high tiers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
706 posts
3,468 battles
41 minutes ago, Ducky_shot said:

So why does WG care about cv players making stupid mistakes and fixes the game for them while ignoring dds that make stupid mistakes?? 

Because making CV only playable for people who have more than 2 digits of IQ, would mean low numbers and a recognised failure. And we all KNOW failure cannot be acceptable by WG... They are too proud for that shi..... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
663
[-OG-]
Members
283 posts
7,729 battles

Anyone who knows me, knows I am not a fan of Carrier's for various reasons, the main one being that the core gameplay of World of Warships is concealment. Carriers who can spot anywhere any time completely break this core mechanic and as a result are the most broken class in the game. WarGaming has made this class even more broken through the bad game design of carriers, the "infinite" amount of planes being a perfect example. Because while technically speaking there is a limit to the amount of aircraft that can be produced in a specific amount of time the fact that they produce aircraft till the second the HP reaches zero results in the feeling of invincibility. "Who cares I lost an entire squadron? It'll regenerate." This completely nullifies the feeling of loss and the importance of those aircraft. In the old carrier design, the idea of losing an entire squadron was terrifying because you just lost a bunch of planes that WOULD NOT be able to come back. The carrier had to consider the pros and cons of attacking a ship with strong AA, on the one hand, you removed a DM a ship with high DPM, radar and strong armour when used correctly but on the other hand, you'd lose most of your attack squadrons and be severely handicapped for the remainder of the game. There is no feeling of that anymore, losing an entire squadron feels like "eh whatever, it'll be back in 3 minutes" that is terrible game design, in a game based around concealment they've given the class with the most spotting potential a zero risk, all reward system.

 

I will also add to this, that DD's are without a doubt the hardest ship class in this game to play and the DD is the most influential ship class. Dealing with spotting, radar, capture point control, scouting, screening and teamplay are all things that every single DD has to deal with every single game. The only reason a DD is capable of all this is because of their high stealth ability. In a game of concealment having the lowest detection range allows them to find the enemy without being seen, get into the capture point without being seen etc. The carrier completely nullifies this by being a flying radar with no time limit, it can go anywhere at any time and can spot even the ships with the lowest detection with ease because of their high speed and no range limit.  DD's are punished for playing as a DD and as a team player, they unlike the carrier playing a DD is VERY high risk with almost no reward.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,649
[WOLF3]
Members
27,085 posts
23,857 battles

You people are just now realizing this after 1 year of the CV Rework? :Smile_veryhappy:

 

The fact should have been abundantly clear even when the Rebork was still on PTS.  The single biggest indicator is how hard it is for a CV to attack another CV, like, your squads get regularly wiped out by a quick cooldown, unending series of CAP fighters.  You have the chance for one, low powered attack before you lose everything.  This was brought up when it was all still on PTS, but the reason why it went Live was WG didn't want what happened in the RTS CV Days:  Clearly better CV players wiping out the worse ones.

 

This isn't like a good vs bad DD player.  They may not even spawn opposite each other nor even encounter each other.  Even Potato Yamato vs Unicum Yamato in the same match may not even engage each other due to spawns and how the game rolls.  CVs by tradition, especially in the RTS CV days, were the only ones where you could find your counterpart and attack him, so CV vs CV interaction was more "personal" than the other ships despite the distances involved.

 

WG didn't want that to happen anymore.

It's very protected compared to the RTS CV days where the good ones could and *DID* wipe the floor with the bad ones.

Edited by HazeGrayUnderway
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,058
[BONKS]
Members
1,502 posts
50 battles

Because DDs haven't had an extensive rework in which plenty of effort, time and most importantly money was sunk into.

Not helping potato CVs with crutches = fewer players playing CVs = rework is failure. And WG cannot fail just like RBMK reactors cannot explode.

  • Cool 2
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,590
Members
6,621 posts
20,677 battles

The biggest problem with DD's (or the people that play them) is that the game almost changes completely  from low tier play to high tier play. Yet players still do the same silly stuff we all did when we first started playing.....Hug the sidelines and hunt the CV, rush to cap first or sit in smoke and get that cap! Many don't understand or transition into a game setting that has radar and hydro and advanced CV's that hit much harder. So many players don't even know how to turn their AA on or off or when to do so.

Early Cruiser and BB play is basically the same as it is at high tier......don't show broadside.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,808
[WORX]
Members
10,708 posts
18,582 battles

JIngles noted this in one of his many videos... Before the rework, you catch CV messing up or out of position... It was game over for the CV driver... 

Now after the rework... CV driver can mess up all they like and still live...

CVs are no longer an automatic kill before the Rework.. Its just the many changes in the interaction of CV/DDs.

I dont like it, if a CV is caught with his "pants down." We should have every right to sink it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
500
[KILL]
Members
948 posts
10,991 battles
1 hour ago, WernerHerzdog said:

I think this is the original source

 

So in essence,   Baby seal clubbing in on like DONKEY KONG!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,289
[SALVO]
Members
24,838 posts
25,932 battles
13 minutes ago, Waxing_Gibbous said:

The biggest problem with DD's (or the people that play them) is that the game almost changes completely  from low tier play to high tier play. Yet players still do the same silly stuff we all did when we first started playing.....Hug the sidelines and hunt the CV, rush to cap first or sit in smoke and get that cap! Many don't understand or transition into a game setting that has radar and hydro and advanced CV's that hit much harder. So many players don't even know how to turn their AA on or off or when to do so.

Early Cruiser and BB play is basically the same as it is at high tier......don't show broadside.

 

There is a lot of truth to this first paragraph, I suppose.  Low tier DD players not adapting to the changing environment as you go up in tier.    But I also wonder to what degree having some DD players be casuals who don't really care about winning or losing, or being cautious and staying alive vs. being reckless and dying far too easily is a factor here.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
215 posts
5,343 battles
1 hour ago, Ducky_shot said:

When the cv rework came into being a year ago, the consumables and dot were seriously reworked. WG wanted players to focus on their squadrons and not have to worry about their cv as much. So we got automatic consumables, instant DCP, long duration DCP, and 5 second fires. These protect those tunnel visioned cv players who are too stupid to move their cv or don't pay attention to the minimap and keep them from being easily killed, especially by dds and cls. WG cared enough about cv players making stupid mistakes and didn't want them punished for them. 

Fast forward a year and WG says dd vs cv interaction is fine because less skilled dd players are too stupid to survive regardless of there being a cv or not. 

579620762_Screenshot_20200220-1045022.thumb.png.a9cbee7ab101c7175ad9e8cf76e59bce.png

So why does WG care about cv players making stupid mistakes and fixes the game for them while ignoring dds that make stupid mistakes?? 

I'm not asking for them to help dds like they help cvs. I'm simply asking that all the crutches given to cv players to prevent them from being deleted by dds and cls be reverted. They shouldn't be compensated so that they survive when they pull a stupid move if other classes don't get that same compensation. 

WG, please don't fix stupid!! 

Nobody will miss the DD if he dies and is not a game changer unless he sinks two or 3 ships at the start of the game directly or indirectly.
Cv's Influence the whole game given there one on each side and should one of the sides lose its Cv then you'll see the game come to a faster end.
yes you got the truth right there.
DD players are considered expendable and more likely to die because of poor skills compared to a Cv player.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,289
[SALVO]
Members
24,838 posts
25,932 battles
23 minutes ago, Navalpride33 said:

JIngles noted this in one of his many videos... Before the rework, you catch CV messing up or out of position... It was game over for the CV driver... 

Now after the rework... CV driver can mess up all they like and still live...

CVs are no longer an automatic kill before the Rework.. Its just the many changes in the interaction of CV/DDs.

I dont like it, if a CV is caught with his "pants down." We should have every right to sink it.

I can't agree with this.  I've seen plenty of CV drivers who make mistakes with their ship pay for their mistakes with a sunk carrier. 

Sure, carriers that get set on fire never seem to stay ablaze for long.  And that seems like an issue.  But it seems like a relatively simple two pronged issue.  1) They should increase the duration that those fires can burn before the auto DCP gets triggered.  And 2) maybe I'm wrong here but it seems like the cooldown between the DCP charges is terribly short.  This could be easily fixed, I'd think.  With these two tweaks, it'd seem that fires on CVs would be more of a thing.

Also, you already have every right to sink a CV whenever you can catch him.  The key is getting the job done.  Also, you have to consider that not all DDs are particularly well equipped for easily sinking carriers.    From my experience, USN DDs are particularly poor at gunning down carriers because their high arcing shells tend to land on the CV's flight deck and shatter easily.  OTOH, DDs with flatter shell arcs (think Russian DDs) tend to be pretty good at gunning down CVs.  Regardless, DDs trying to gun down CVs is a damned slow process, and the carrier can be spending all that time trying to sink the attacking DD.  Generally speaking, it's a lot easier to take down a CV with a cruiser due to their stronger, more damaging  guns, since it'll take less time to get the job done (and give the CV less time to be attacking the cruiser).

From my experience, carriers are no more immune to being sunk than they were before the rework.

  • Boring 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×