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

CV Reword Autopsy: One year+ Later

127 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

998
[HINON]
Members
4,021 posts
4,993 battles

Alright, so it's been over a year now, perhaps a year and a half, since the CV rework, and I feel like there should be a lot of consideration about what went wrong. There were a lot of promises made about the CV rework and a lot of us, myself included, said for a long time that we should just wait and see. I think it's time that we stop waiting and seeing and start talking and discussing, because if we don't, no one will. And let's not fool ourselves, a LOT went wrong.

I'm not going to sugarcoat any of this, because what little "good" that has resulted from the rework is inevitably mired in what is wrong with it and almost inevitably directly linked to things that are wrong with it. I also know that this post is likely not going to change anything as Wargaming seem like they've dug their heels in, but I think it's worth it to consider for anyone ever developing games in the future or any reworks that are considered of other classes in the future.

Let's start with the old RTS system, which had its own problems. I'll list some of these here:

  • Carriers, mostly being a few specific examples, were extremely powerful
  • Carriers had a different playstyle from surface ships, meaning that there was a divide between the skills required for ships of all other classes and CVs
  • There was an intense skill-gap in CVs, where experienced players could absolutely destroy inexperienced CV players or their teams
  • There weren't that many CV-specific modules and skills to choose from

There were also only two CV lines, and premium CVs tended to, on average, be better than tech tree counterparts, sometimes oppressively so, like with Saipan. And, there were some decent things that came to help some of those issues:

  • Planes having hitpoints instead of RNG deciding if all your planes die at once/who gets a plane kill and who gets denied what would have been a hard-earned Clear Skies
  • Surface Ships have some level of control over their AA sectors and can see and get rewarded for the damage they do to planes
  • CVs have a lot of Captains skills and modules to choose from to tailor their way of playing
  • Rocket aircraft are a strong addition to represent an important form of carrier-born aviation and warfare
  • A lot of bugs surrounding CVs got fixed, like AA through islands and air-detection issues

So how did this go so wrong? Namely, the systemic rework that removed the RTS-lite components in favor of what is in the game now. The ability to support your team is gone; you have one consumable for spawning a couple of fighters to oppress DDs or sit there oblivious while enemy aircraft go right past them. Aerial torpedoes do pathetic levels of damage, almost never cause flooding, and flooding itself is almost worthless as a damage source. Any CV that is not top tier is worthless to play when uptiered, because Tier 8 and Tier 6 ships have long AA ranges and massive AA damage compared to Tier 6 and Tier 4 planes. If you thought Wargaming was adding a German line this year, I am so very sorry for you. That's not a line, that's a worthless dead-end of experience and credits that you might as well not even bother with. Limiting CVs to one squadron at a time is hard, because to compensate the CV, their squadrons would have to scale to ludicrous strengths... except they didn't do that. And you can't enjoy these features because everything that surrounds them is just bad. The core mechanic is bad.

What was accomplished in this?

  • There is still a skill divide. There may be CVs more frequently in matches now, but that is probably more attributable to the steady influx of new CV lines than CVs being fun or interesting to play.
  • There is still a heavy skill gap and now it's even worse; just watch a video by Yuro and try to emulate it. Chances are you won't.
  • CVs are still annoying to play against in that they can spot you for long periods even if they aren't trying to attack you, and can still focus ships down "with impunity." (Arguably with even more impunity now because many CVs just won't run out of aircraft even though they theoretically have soft-caps on how many they can have)
  • A lot of RTS Veterans, either of CVs or who played against CVs, left CVs and either went to other ship classes or left the game

It is actually hard to look at the new CV lines because those lines would have probably been feasible and even decent in the RTS system. German paper aircraft would have meant something, because they would have been the quintessential glass cannon, and players would have had to manage their aircraft much more strictly than those of other nations. Now, though, they feel like a kick in the ribs every time you look at a match and see almost all Tier 8s in your Weser or, worse, the E. Loewenhardt you paid $25 for (if you were like me and thought you might treat yourself this paycheck.) If you bought the "Admiral Pack" for $50.... ohh boy am I sorry for you, and I can only hope you haven't played it yet and can still get a refund. Meanwhile, the British CVs would have been slower and tougher, making it harder to fight over disparate areas of the map but easier to focus on small areas to fight in. Instead, well... CVs are worse than worthless on your team in an uptier and difficult to play even when top-tier.

This is why the Rework did not go well: Wargaming shifted everything around like they did in Artillery 2.0, but they reduced the CV to a damage farmer instead of a support ship and then reduced its damage farming capabilities to a mere token. They put in national flavors around this rework but didn't address the issues that made and still make certain nations somewhat strong and certain nations pathetically weak, and they didn't address the issue that, if CVs are somehow supposed to operate off of one squad at a time, that that squad is going to have to be ludicrously strong to make-up for it. The end result is that the class was thrown by the wayside and just outright ignored despite the promises of attention.

I haven't done a dive into things like the atrociously bad CV economy or the desperately-wanting sense of accomplishment for a grind (grinding a ship over a month is infinitely more rewarding than grinding half a ship over a month because Wargaming decided there would be one ship every two tiers.)

Don't get me wrong, these aren't new issues, but they are infinitely worse after the rework than before it.

 

Edited by Carrier_Lexington
  • Cool 10
  • Thanks 3
  • Boring 4
  • Meh 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
531
Members
558 posts
5,048 battles

I'd go back to RTS in a heartbeat for the true no fly zone ships, no CVs in clan battles or ranked, and CVs in 5% of random battles or less.

The new CVs are anything but weak or neglected. 

  • Cool 25

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,423
[META_]
Members
2,282 posts
7,823 battles
11 minutes ago, Carrier_Lexington said:

Alright, so it's been over a year now, perhaps a year and a half, since the CV rework, and I feel like there should be a lot of consideration about what went wrong. There were a lot of promises made about the CV rework and a lot of us, myself included, said for a long time that we should just wait and see. I think it's time that we stop waiting and seeing and start talking and discussing, because if we don't, no one will. And let's not fool ourselves, a LOT went wrong.

I'm not going to sugarcoat any of this, because what little "good" that has resulted from the rework is inevitably mired in what is wrong with it and almost inevitably directly linked to things that are wrong with it. I also know that this post is likely not going to change anything as Wargaming seem like they've dug their heels in, but I think it's worth it to consider for anyone ever developing games in the future or any reworks that are considered of other classes in the future.

Let's start with the old RTS system, which had its own problems. I'll list some of these here:

  • Carriers, mostly being a few specific examples, were extremely powerful
  • Carriers had a different playstyle from surface ships, meaning that there was a divide between the skills required for ships of all other classes and CVs
  • There was an intense skill-gap in CVs, where experienced players could absolutely destroy inexperienced CV players or their teams
  • There weren't that many CV-specific modules and skills to choose from

There were also only two CV lines, and premium CVs tended to, on average, be better than tech tree counterparts, sometimes oppressively so, like with Saipan. And, there were some decent things that came to help some of those issues:

  • Planes having hitpoints instead of RNG deciding if all your planes die at once/who gets a plane kill and who gets denied what would have been a hard-earned Clear Skies
  • Surface Ships have some level of control over their AA sectors and can see and get rewarded for the damage they do to planes
  • CVs have a lot of Captains skills and modules to choose from to tailor their way of playing
  • Rocket aircraft are a strong addition to represent an important form of carrier-born aviation and warfare
  • A lot of bugs surrounding CVs got fixed, like AA through islands and air-detection issues

So how did this go so wrong? Namely, the systemic rework that removed the RTS-lite components in favor of what is in the game now. The ability to support your team is gone; you have one consumable for spawning a couple of fighters to oppress DDs or sit there oblivious while enemy aircraft go right past them. Aerial torpedoes do pathetic levels of damage, almost never cause flooding, and flooding itself is almost worthless as a damage source. Any CV that is not top tier is worthless to play when uptiered, because Tier 8 and Tier 6 ships have long AA ranges and massive AA damage compared to Tier 6 and Tier 4 planes. If you thought Wargaming was adding a German line this year, I am so very sorry for you. That's not a line, that's a worthless dead-end of experience and credits that you might as well not even bother with. Limiting CVs to one squadron at a time is hard, because to compensate the CV, their squadrons would have to scale to ludicrous strengths... except they didn't do that. And you can't enjoy these features because everything that surrounds them is just bad. The core mechanic is bad.

What was accomplished in this?

  • There is still a skill divide. There may be CVs more frequently in matches now, but that is probably more attributable to the steady influx of new CV lines than CVs being fun or interesting to play.
  • There is still a heavy skill gap and now it's even worse; just watch a video by Yuro and try to emulate it. Chances are you won't.
  • CVs are still annoying to play against in that they can spot you for long periods even if they aren't trying to attack you, and can still focus ships down "with impunity." (Arguably with even more impunity now because many CVs just won't run out of aircraft even though they theoretically have soft-caps on how many they can have)
  • A lot of RTS Veterans, either of CVs or who played against CVs, left CVs and either went to other ship classes or left the game

It is actually hard to look at the new CV lines because those lines would have probably been feasible and even decent in the RTS system. German paper aircraft would have meant something, because they would have been the quintessential glass cannon, and players would have had to manage their aircraft much more strictly than those of other nations. Now, though, they feel like a kick in the ribs every time you look at a match and see almost all Tier 8s in your Weser or, worse, the E. Loewenhardt you paid $25 for (if you were like me and thought you might treat yourself this paycheck.) If you bought the "Admiral Pack" for $50.... ohh boy am I sorry for you, and I can only hope you haven't played it yet and can still get a refund. Meanwhile, the British CVs would have been slower and tougher, making it harder to fight over disparate areas of the map but easier to focus on small areas to fight in. Instead, well... CVs are worse than worthless on your team in an uptier and difficult to play even when top-tier.

This is why the Rework did not go well: Wargaming shifted everything around like they did in Artillery 2.0, but they reduced the CV to a damage farmer instead of a support ship and then reduced its damage farming capabilities to a mere token. They put in national flavors around this rework but didn't address the issues that made and still make certain nations somewhat strong and certain nations pathetically weak, and they didn't address the issue that, if CVs are somehow supposed to operate off of one squad at a time, that that squad is going to have to be ludicrously strong to make-up for it. The end result is that the class was thrown by the wayside and just outright ignored despite the promises of attention.

I haven't done a dive into things like the atrociously bad CV economy or the desperately-wanting sense of accomplishment for a grind (grinding a ship over a month is infinitely more rewarding than grinding half a ship over a month because Wargaming decided there would be one ship every two tiers.)

Don't get me wrong, almost none of these problems didn't exist in some form or another before the rework, but they are infinitely worse afterwards.

Now, I do want to point out that there are rumors of a savior. A CV beyond all others that shall stand against the tides of criminally-neglected mid-tiers and dropped game mechanics. A CV to rescue the class from irrelevance and bring fire and brimstone down against those who dare chant the blasphemous defiances of "Remove CVs." Our Sanguinor and St. Celestine, descending from the heavens right when all hope seemed lost to bathe the enemy in the fires of burning judgement (and rocket-strikes). [Of course, that ship is WiP and subject to change, and also either liable to cost and arm and a leg or another ridiculous Dockyard grind.] Still, we can only hope that such a ship is a portent of reinforcement and redemption.

 

i almost want to log in, and start playing CVs!! not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,071
[LRM]
[LRM]
Members
2,983 posts
9,910 battles

The problem with anything related to CV rework discussions is the same kind of environment that has existed, as far as I know, since I started playing in 2015 with Open Beta. 

The community has always been divided on every issue, and can never come to an agreement on anything unless the situation is universally horrendous. 

That being said, the community will never agree on what CV's were or should be. They will never agree on how it should be balanced, how they should work, or how they interact. What makes CV's so awkward is that it is a vehicle that deploys other vehicles, and will always be a challenge to balance because everyone's interpretation of how that should work is different. 

This community will continue to be divided on the issues of CV's until the game sunsets at this rate, just as they will be divided on almost every other issue abound.

Edited by Maine_ARC_1
  • Cool 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,073
[SALVO]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
6,352 posts
6,944 battles

Kaga is OP as hell. Papa love it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,758
[KWF]
Members
6,359 posts
7,145 battles
20 minutes ago, Carrier_Lexington said:

Let's start with the old RTS system, which had its own problems. I'll list some of these here:

  • Carriers, mostly being a few specific examples, were extremely powerful
  • Carriers had a different playstyle from surface ships, meaning that there was a divide between the skills required for ships of all other classes and CVs
  • There was an intense skill-gap in CVs, where experienced players could absolutely destroy inexperienced CV players or their teams
  • There weren't that many CV-specific modules and skills to choose from

There were also only two CV lines, and premium CVs tended to, on average, be better than tech tree counterparts, sometimes oppressively so, like with Saipan. And, there were some decent things that came to help some of those issues:

  • Planes having hitpoints instead of RNG deciding if all your planes die at once/who gets a plane kill and who gets denied what would have been a hard-earned Clear Skies
  • Surface Ships have some level of control over their AA sectors and can see and get rewarded for the damage they do to planes
  • CVs have a lot of Captains skills and modules to choose from to tailor their way of playing
  • Rocket aircraft are a strong addition to represent an important form of carrier-born aviation and warfare
  • A lot of bugs surrounding CVs got fixed, like AA through islands and air-detection issues

So how did this go so wrong? Namely, the systemic rework that removed the RTS-lite components in favor of what is in the game now. The ability to support your team is gone; you have one consumable for spawning a couple of fighters to oppress DDs or sit there oblivious while enemy aircraft go right past them. Aerial torpedoes do pathetic levels of damage, almost never cause flooding, and flooding itself is almost worthless as a damage source. Any CV that is not top tier is worthless to play when uptiered, because Tier 8 and Tier 6 ships have long AA ranges and massive AA damage compared to Tier 6 and Tier 4 planes. If you thought Wargaming was adding a German line this year, I am so very sorry for you. That's not a line, that's a worthless dead-end of experience and credits that you might as well not even bother with. Limiting CVs to one squadron at a time is hard, because to compensate the CV, their squadrons would have to scale to ludicrous strengths... except they didn't do that. And you can't enjoy these features because everything that surrounds them is just bad. The core mechanic is bad.

What was accomplished in this?

  • There is still a skill divide. There may be CVs more frequently in matches now, but that is probably more attributable to the steady influx of new CV lines than CVs being fun or interesting to play.
  • There is still a heavy skill gap and now it's even worse; just watch a video by Yuro and try to emulate it. Chances are you won't.
  • CVs are still annoying to play against in that they can spot you for long periods even if they aren't trying to attack you, and can still focus ships down "with impunity." (Arguably with even more impunity now because many CVs just won't run out of aircraft even though they theoretically have soft-caps on how many they can have)
  • A lot of RTS Veterans, either of CVs or who played against CVs, left CVs and either went to other ship classes or left the game

 

 

Will only respond to this. There's one big change that you forgot to mention, that makes all the difference imo regarding the rework. 

CVs in RTS were an infrequent/uncommon sight, the least popular class by far.

The rework brought quite a few people that didn't enjoy the RTS system on board.

Nowadays CVs have never been more popular, and I'm willing to bet that in general this is the biggest measure of success to WG.

  • Cool 5
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
998
[HINON]
Members
4,021 posts
4,993 battles
5 minutes ago, warheart1992 said:

Nowadays CVs have never been more popular

I did mention that, but I'll say it again: I am not sure that is necessarily due to CVs being good as to them being novel. We don't really have access to Wargaming's internal records.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,117
[TARK]
Members
7,331 posts
3,164 battles
19 minutes ago, Carrier_Lexington said:

Alright, so it's been over a year now, perhaps a year and a half, since the CV rework, and I feel like there should be a lot of consideration about what went wrong. There were a lot of promises made about the CV rework and a lot of us, myself included, said for a long time that we should just wait and see. I think it's time that we stop waiting and seeing and start talking and discussing, because if we don't, no one will. And let's not fool ourselves, a LOT went wrong.

Yes, it did.

And the people demanding we 'wait and see' are complicit in that.

But lets see what you have to say...

21 minutes ago, Carrier_Lexington said:

I'm not going to sugarcoat any of this, because what little "good" that has resulted from the rework is inevitably mired in what is wrong with it and almost inevitably directly linked to things that are wrong with it. I also know that this post is likely not going to change anything as Wargaming seem like they've dug their heels in, but I think it's worth it to consider for anyone ever developing games in the future or any reworks that are considered of other classes in the future.

Indeed, none of us are the special people that WG listens to on issues of air power.

23 minutes ago, Carrier_Lexington said:

Let's start with the old RTS system, which had its own problems. I'll list some of these here:

  • Carriers, mostly being a few specific examples, were extremely powerful
  • Carriers had a different playstyle from surface ships, meaning that there was a divide between the skills required for ships of all other classes and CVs
  • There was an intense skill-gap in CVs, where experienced players could absolutely destroy inexperienced CV players or their teams
  • There weren't that many CV-specific modules and skills to choose from

There were also only two CV lines, and premium CVs tended to, on average, be better than tech tree counterparts, sometimes oppressively so, like with Saipan. And, there were some decent things that came to help some of those issues:

  • Planes having hitpoints instead of RNG deciding if all your planes die at once/who gets a plane kill and who gets denied what would have been a hard-earned Clear Skies
  • Surface Ships have some level of control over their AA sectors and can see and get rewarded for the damage they do to planes
  • CVs have a lot of Captains skills and modules to choose from to tailor their way of playing
  • Rocket aircraft are a strong addition to represent an important form of carrier-born aviation and warfare
  • A lot of bugs surrounding CVs got fixed, like AA through islands and air-detection issues

The skill gap was driven by an awful UI for strafing and manual attacks that WG refused to fix.

Other than that, its a good surface level assessment of the problems with CVs from before 0.8.0. I could give more, but thats not the point.

Now, hit points makes it easy for a CV captain to predict his plane losses from any attack. Thats not 'better' gameplay.

Surface ships have LESS control over their AA output than before...AND those controls are less impactful.

There is very little variety in captain skill and module build out for CVs. All of them can be lumped into DOT reliant (UK and most US), and AP reliant (IJN and KM).

Rocket aircraft are blatantly ahistorical and breathtakingly OP in the hands of a skilled pilot.

Autopilot bugs remain, many current bugs have been redefined as features...just like the old strafing UI bugs were...

So, no. Everything you post here as a positive is actually a negative.

31 minutes ago, Carrier_Lexington said:

So how did this go so wrong? Namely, the systemic rework that removed the RTS-lite components in favor of what is in the game now. The ability to support your team is gone; you have one consumable for spawning a couple of fighters to oppress DDs or sit there oblivious while enemy aircraft go right past them. Aerial torpedoes do pathetic levels of damage, almost never cause flooding, and flooding itself is almost worthless as a damage source. Any CV that is not top tier is worthless to play when uptiered, because Tier 8 and Tier 6 ships have long AA ranges and massive AA damage compared to Tier 6 and Tier 4 planes. If you thought Wargaming was adding a German line this year, I am so very sorry for you. That's not a line, that's a worthless dead-end of experience and credits that you might as well not even bother with. Limiting CVs to one squadron at a time is hard, because to compensate the CV, their squadrons would have to scale to ludicrous strengths... except they didn't do that. And you can't enjoy these features because everything that surrounds them is just bad. The core mechanic is bad.

WG has spent the last 3 years trying to stop CVs from being support ships. They want them damage farming.

Tier 8 CVs, properly upgraded, are fine against tier 10 ships with sufficient skill.

I agree that the core mechanic is bad...

More to come but I have to stop for a while, my son wants me.

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 1
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,895
[RLGN]
Members
16,172 posts
28,066 battles
2 minutes ago, Carrier_Lexington said:

I did mention that, but I'll say it again: I am not sure that is necessarily due to CVs being good as to them being novel. We don't really have access to Wargaming's internal records.

What irritates the hell out of me more than anything else is the idiotic ‘Death by a Thousand Cuts.’

In RTS if you trolled a CV into a miss they went away for a while. Now, not even taking the multiple attack runs mechanic into account, a new squad could be over you again in 30-60 seconds. There’s some serious ‘da**it! Just go away for a while!’ hate to be had there.

  • Cool 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,076 posts
12,742 battles

WG could have just cleaned up a few of the more egregious problems with the RTS system, properly incorporated tutorials and enticements to play, and the Fly Strike Win launch of the RN carrier line would have brought more folks to the type without going to the rework.

  • Cool 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
998
[HINON]
Members
4,021 posts
4,993 battles
3 minutes ago, Estimated_Prophet said:

Now, not even taking the multiple attack runs mechanic into account, a new squad could be over you again in 30-60 seconds. There’s some serious ‘da**it! Just go away for a while!’ hate to be had there.

I got Aerial Defense Expert in a Moskva the other day off of a Manfred von Richthofen, killing 44 planes. I still got bad rewards afterwards because I kept getting beat up by the ships that would perpetually see me, and it was still annoying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,200
[TDRB]
Members
5,310 posts
13,743 battles
2 hours ago, warheart1992 said:

Nowadays CVs have never been more popular, and I'm willing to bet that in general this is the biggest measure of success to WG.

I believe you hit the nail squarely on the head. But that is from WG view point.

Players have a different view. It is apparent in the eyes of many players major issues were not addressed with the rework.

2 hours ago, Carrier_Lexington said:

I did mention that, but I'll say it again: I am not sure that is necessarily due to CVs being good as to them being novel. We don't really have access to Wargaming's internal records.

In the 18 plus months since 8.0 went live we've had several CV events. As with all other ship classes, this creates a huge spike in the number of whatever class/ship the event is built around.

It seems, in the lulls between the CV events the number of CV's drops to reasonable levels except in tier 4 where newly obtained CV's are being "test driven".

 

Edited by kgh52
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
998
[HINON]
Members
4,021 posts
4,993 battles
1 minute ago, Mono_De_Mantequilla said:

WG could have just cleaned up a few of the more egregious problems with the RTS system, properly incorporated tutorials and enticements to play, and the Fly Strike Win launch of the RN carrier line would have brought more folks to the type without going to the rework.

I honestly feel like planes could have been made a bit more fragile in the RTS, or had their health used as a balancing factor,

 

10 minutes ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

Surface ships have LESS control over their AA output than before...AND those controls are less impactful.

There is very little variety in captain skill and module build out for CVs. All of them can be lumped into DOT reliant (UK and most US), and AP reliant (IJN and KM).

Rocket aircraft are blatantly ahistorical and breathtakingly OP in the hands of a skilled pilot.

Autopilot bugs remain, many current bugs have been redefined as features...just like the old strafing UI bugs were...

I'm going to address these in-turn:

1.) Surface Ships having control over AA sectors and numbers they can see is demonstrably more control than "put on upgrades and hope RNG rolls in your favor." It's maybe not what most would consider sufficient, but it's a step.

2.) This is still more variety than there was in the previous US vs IJN, though I agree that a lot of it is token variety thanks to the awful core system.

3.) Both the US and the British made and actively developed rockets for attacks on shipping. FFARs, HVARs, and Tiny Tims were developed for both ground and naval combat. Meanwhile, the British actively developed and manufactured and even deployed rockets like Uncle Tom and Red Angel, designed to fight against destroyers and cruisers; the Red Angels were absolutely designed around being able to destroy cruisers in a couple of good hits. Of course, these rockets aren't in WoWS with the exception of the US ones.

4.) There are bugs that remain, yes, but even the Autopilot has less bugs than it used to. Meanwhile, AA and plane-detection through solid islands has been addressed so that planes have detection points now. It is less noticeable, though, because of the new core system that is so bad it sucks what little good came out of the rework into a bottomless abyss.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,179
[PISD]
Members
1,921 posts
6,290 battles
31 minutes ago, Carrier_Lexington said:

I did mention that, but I'll say it again: I am not sure that is necessarily due to CVs being good as to them being novel. We don't really have access to Wargaming's internal records.

I would argue otherwise: with the RTS system the skill gap had a bigger effect and many new players just stopped grinding CV after being deplaned by the other CV 3 game on 4 and causing their team the loss. Now at least, even if you face Yuro you will not be detrimental to your team, which encourage more people to play it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
998
[HINON]
Members
4,021 posts
4,993 battles
17 minutes ago, Y_Nagato said:

even if you face Yuro you will not be detrimental to your team

Actually, I feel a better frame for this is: "You won't be any more detrimental to your team than you already are." I don't think we have a lot of data around CV popularity that isn't biased around a large quantity of CV events yet, but the sheer fact of the matter is, if you're an uptiered Tier 4, 6, or even 8, you aren't going to be able to do much while Yuro will destroy your team.

Edited by Carrier_Lexington
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,981
[V_KNG]
Beta Testers
13,197 posts
59 minutes ago, exray0 said:

I'd go back to RTS in a heartbeat for the true no fly zone ships, no CVs in clan battles or ranked, and CVs in 5% of random battles or less.

The new CVs are anything but weak or neglected. 

You say that now but realize - there are a whole lot MORE CV players than there used to be... willing to be a good number of them would literally wipe the oceans clear. I say this because RTS version was far more powerful. A number of the players I'm watching these days "get it" strategy-wise. 

Trust me, you would not want to go back. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,021
[HINON]
Members
8,978 posts
13,134 battles
53 minutes ago, Dr_Venture said:

Kaga is OP as hell. Papa love it.

 

like i said, she's probably second ONLY to Enterprise in being the most powerful CV in the game, premium or not, of all the premiums in the game Kaga and Enterprise are 2 CV premiums i wouldnt be upset over seeing in a Super Container drop

Edited by tcbaker777
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
81
[SFOR]
Beta Testers
437 posts
10,356 battles

I did like the video from the CC conference full of charts showing that CV were indeed Op (eg limit 1/game at high tier is a clue). The charts were WG and quite explicit on how CV were affecting the game

  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,981
[V_KNG]
Beta Testers
13,197 posts
45 minutes ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

The skill gap was driven by an awful UI for strafing and manual attacks that WG refused to fix.

Other than that, its a good surface level assessment of the problems with CVs from before 0.8.0. I could give more, but thats not the point.

Okay so think about this... when they released the rework, "they" felt carriers were "ready to go". They totally, completely underestimated the skill of their very own customers. 

Carriers were blowing everything up, every match. Over 100K were common, 200K you'd see and I even think a few folks broke into the 300K range. What they released they believed to be completely ready for public consumption. 

Pretty sure they had tons of feedback prior to the release, buckets and buckets of data poured through thousands of spreadsheets and yet, they released what was probably the most OP ship type ever into this game. You remember the constant, constant, constant nerfing? Such nerfing I'd don't recall seeing to an entire ship type. 

Well... there was the rudder adjustments. Yack. Still leaves a bad smell just mentioning it. 

So now we expect the (more or less) same group of people to take our feedback, sift it, analyze it and come up with meaningful solutions to issues we all warned them about as soon at 0.8.0 dropped?

Are we all being realistic here? 

Edited by Herr_Reitz
  • Cool 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,934
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester
28,323 posts
14,923 battles
51 minutes ago, warheart1992 said:

Will only respond to this. There's one big change that you forgot to mention, that makes all the difference imo regarding the rework. 

CVs in RTS were an infrequent/uncommon sight, the least popular class by far.

The rework brought quite a few people that didn't enjoy the RTS system on board.

Nowadays CVs have never been more popular, and I'm willing to bet that in general this is the biggest measure of success to WG.

Outside of events like the current KMS CV launch they are still fairly uncommon although more common than in the RTS days with only tier 4 being overly popular.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,179
[PISD]
Members
1,921 posts
6,290 battles
12 minutes ago, Carrier_Lexington said:

Actually, I feel a better frame for this is: "You won't be any more detrimental to your team than you already are." I don't think we have a lot of data around CV p[opularity that isn't biased around a large quantity of CV events yet, but the sheer fact of the matter is, if you're an uptiered Tier 4, 6, or even 8, you aren't going to be able to do much while Yuro will destroy your team.

''huge'' quantity. We had 3 in 2 years so nothing really there.

And sure the opponent CV will be doing better than you, just like a better DD captain will be doing. But at least you will be in the game and still help the team instead of being a pinata with no more plane.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
998
[HINON]
Members
4,021 posts
4,993 battles
7 minutes ago, Y_Nagato said:

But at least you will be in the game and still help the team instead of being a pinata with no more plane.

Weser, Rhein, Loewenhardt, Ranger, Langley, and Lexington would probably disagree with you. Also, 3 CV events in ONE year, not two, is a large quantity. More if you count the hype surrounding the Reworks themselves.

Edited by Carrier_Lexington

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
514
[VORTX]
Members
659 posts
8,297 battles

CV's are poisonous. They are a huge reason players are toxic. This is a game, its supposed to be fun. They aren't fun. They have the ability to kill any ship within a tier or so from across the map without taking any damage themselves with little regard to players skill. How is that good for anyone but the cv driver? Game can come down to two against one CV and as long as the CV moves, its game over. Its' a complete wash and absolute trash. It has become glaringly present the more I have played, and the better I have gotten. It doesn't matter if you know how to play, you have zero strategy against them. All other ships, including Smolensk can be fun to play against. You don't get [edited] with CV. You just get stomped on. Maybe kill some planes in the process. 

Edited by Fifi_Macaffee
  • Cool 6
  • Boring 1
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,669
[CLUMP]
Members
1,885 posts
2,412 battles

I saw a video of RTS CVs they where broken and OP in the right hands :Smile_trollface: So ya complaining about the rework is a joke really :Smile_popcorn:

Edited by LastRemnant
  • Cool 2
  • Boring 2
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,396
[INTEL]
Members
13,459 posts
38,995 battles
59 minutes ago, Y_Nagato said:

. Now at least, even if you face Yuro you will not be detrimental to your team, which encourage more people to play it.

 Yes, you will be detrimental to your team. You have called down a far superior aircraft carrier player on them. You have ruined their gaming experience while not providing commensurate damage to the other team. Meaning that the game is almost certainly a loss.

The skill gap remains and is even worse actually.

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 2
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×