Rework vs RTS which is better?

[The_Big_Red_1]

when i first saw the leaked footage of rework i was pretty hyped into trying out thinking it was awesome and cool but as time went on i came to regret that everything i saw was not what it looked like to be. some people liked rework while others such as myself (or mainly people who played RTS games in the 90's and early 2000's) not so much. if you ask me rework looks cool on paper and on video footage but in reality it was a step backward instead of forward. the reason why was in RTS you could scout, drive and move/attack with your carrier and or planes at the same time which is pretty quintessential. yes it was a micro-frantic intensive thing but once mastered or at least achieved to a competent level it gets really fun/second nature. in rework you can either fly your planes or drive the ship not both unfortunately (limited options) but i digress.

[RipNuN2]

[Warped_1]

No longer worth exploring

WeeGee has reworked, it will not be rolled back.

I really enjoyed pre rework.  That said, it was more prone to a one sided stomping if there was a discrepancy between skills of CV drivers.  

[AVR_Project]

37 minutes ago, The_Big_Red_1 said:

when i first saw the leaked footage of rework i was pretty hyped into trying out thinking it was awesome and cool but as time went on i came to regret that everything i saw was not what it looked like to be. some people liked rework while others such as myself (or mainly people who played RTS games in the 90's and early 2000's) not so much. if you ask me rework looks cool on paper and on video footage but in reality it was a step backward instead of forward. the reason why was in RTS you could scout, drive and move/attack with your carrier and or planes at the same time which is pretty quintessential. yes it was a micro-frantic intensive thing but once mastered or at least achieved to a competent level it gets really fun/second nature. in rework you can either fly your planes or drive the ship not both unfortunately (limited options) but i digress.

One of the good things to come out of the rework was the 'ABANDON SHIP' maneuver of flying off the deck - right when your CV rams a battleship.
That is sooooooooooooooooooooooooooo  cool !!!  You still have your planes for spotting and maybe one more good attack for a couple minutes.

In the RTS system, once you dunk, those planes you deployed will follow their mission, perhaps even team-killing since -- your command was disconnected.

The one very bad thing is the 'Limited Attack' parcel of the squad getting 3-4 groups to individually attack.  In a low tier battle, we are talking maybe 2 attacks before all the planes are gone.  Often. we only have one chance to get a hit.  The follow-up rarely happens.
Would be nice if I could go all in one attack - like the RTS days.

[BrushWolf]

To the haters it was RTS because the skill floor was so high that few people played them beyond tier 6 making CV's so rare in tier 10 that AA builds were a waste.

[Navalpride33]

RTS CVs by far the better choice then the current monstrosity of the current CV class product. Its not even a debate or question, RTS CVs were better suited for the game as a whole.

Just to give you an example, when 0.8.0 dropped, all the RTS CV players migrated to the China server in droves... Since China server Update when they want to, They're quite happy with getting access to RTS CVs over the current rework CVs.

From my POV, CV reworked is a complete failure as to WG's original CV rework mission statement. Where do we go from here ? Only depends on us spending on other products to subsidize the Rework CVs participation in the game. 

[Daniel_Allan_Clark]

28 minutes ago, AVR_Project said:

Would be nice if I could go all in one attack - like the RTS days

Of course, in the old days...you only got like 1.7 flights of strike total though. Lose the first wave and you didnt get a full replacement for the rest of the game.

[Sabene]

40 minutes ago, Warped_1 said:

No longer worth exploring

WeeGee has reworked, it will not be rolled back.

I really enjoyed pre rework.  That said, it was more prone to a one sided stomping if there was a discrepancy between skills of CV drivers.  

This.

RTS CVs led to some wild games and those that could, did.  The problem was that few folks could do the RTS well enough to be truly competitive.  So the CV class was under utilized.

Now with the rework the CVs are much more playable, though not as exciting.  More people play them.  CV-based stompings are rare.  

CV play is certainly more bland now.  Bit of a shame, sure, but for the overall good of the game WG thought it necessary.  Can't see any reason to argue.

[Ace_04]

Is "None of the Above" an option?

[Wolfswetpaws]

3 hours ago, The_Big_Red_1 said:

when i first saw the leaked footage of rework i was pretty hyped into trying out thinking it was awesome and cool but as time went on i came to regret that everything i saw was not what it looked like to be. some people liked rework while others such as myself (or mainly people who played RTS games in the 90's and early 2000's) not so much. if you ask me rework looks cool on paper and on video footage but in reality it was a step backward instead of forward. the reason why was in RTS you could scout, drive and move/attack with your carrier and or planes at the same time which is pretty quintessential. yes it was a micro-frantic intensive thing but once mastered or at least achieved to a competent level it gets really fun/second nature. in rework you can either fly your planes or drive the ship not both unfortunately (limited options) but i digress.

The RTS had more capabilities that were like actual Aircraft Carrier operations and the command of all ship & plane assets simultaneously.

The "re-work" is a "first person shooter" perspective and reduces the player's role to being a glorified squadron leader.

Both modes put a CV into an extreme situation (opposing ships are within a few minutes of reaching the CV by simply sailing towards it, instead of being about a hundred miles away).

Both modes allow for planes to be recovered and re-launched in time-frames that were not normal in real-life, even accounting for the time-compression the game implements.

In terms of Aircraft Carrier play, the RTS version is better, in my opinion.
I've played both modes (check my stats, which are public).

[AVR_Project]

3 hours ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

Of course, in the old days...you only got like 1.7 flights of strike total though. Lose the first wave and you didnt get a full replacement for the rest of the game.

Tier 7 and above had a pretty good aircraft reserve.  You could also attack with all squads at once, thus overloading the ship's AA.. like in real life.

This 'three planes at once' thing is a tactic real carrier planes NEVER wanted to do.  Just look at the US torpedo bombers at the battle of Midway.

Another unwelcome change is that planes could no longer spot torpedoes.

[The_Big_Red_1]

3 hours ago, Wolfswetpaws said:

The RTS had more capabilities that were like actual Aircraft Carrier operations and the command of all ship & plane assets simultaneously.

The "re-work" is a "first person shooter" perspective and reduces the player's role to being a glorified squadron leader.

Both modes put a CV into an extreme situation (opposing ships are within a few minutes of reaching the CV by simply sailing towards it, instead of being about a hundred miles away).

Both modes allow for planes to be recovered and re-launched in time-frames that were not normal in real-life, even accounting for the time-compression the game implements.

In terms of Aircraft Carrier play, the RTS version is better, in my opinion.
I've played both modes (check my stats, which are public).

do you think the "surface ship mafia" had a hand in making WG think Rework was a good idea? i am sure some of them want carriers removed entirely but given that WG had sunk too much time and money on them. that is most likely not going to happen.

[The_Big_Red_1]

5 hours ago, Warped_1 said:

No longer worth exploring

WeeGee has reworked, it will not be rolled back.

I really enjoyed pre rework.  That said, it was more prone to a one sided stomping if there was a discrepancy between skills of CV drivers.  

WG should have said get gud instead of..."this".

[The_Big_Red_1]

5 hours ago, Sabene said:

This.

RTS CVs led to some wild games and those that could, did.  The problem was that few folks could do the RTS well enough to be truly competitive.  So the CV class was under utilized.

Now with the rework the CVs are much more playable, though not as exciting.  More people play them.  CV-based stompings are rare.  

CV play is certainly more bland now.  Bit of a shame, sure, but for the overall good of the game WG thought it necessary.  Can't see any reason to argue.

only thing carrier benefited from rework if you ask me was "unlimited planes" as it makes carrier play more "forgiving" something that should have been in RTS carriers to give new players to try out different strats.

[Wolfswetpaws]

7 hours ago, The_Big_Red_1 said:

do you think the "surface ship mafia" had a hand in making WG think Rework was a good idea? i am sure some of them want carriers removed entirely but given that WG had sunk too much time and money on them. that is most likely not going to happen.

What I speculate happened versus what I can prove are .... well, I don't have access to the inner workings of WG/WOWs, so I can't prove anything regarding the decision processes of WOWs regarding the "CV re-work".

Old forum posts, if you can find them, show that I opposed the re-work, because it changed & nerfed the Command-of-an-Aircraft-Carrier into something that simply did not have the same capabilities for simultaneous action by multiple units to perform scout/spot/defend/strike/intercept tasks.
CV's went from being WOWs analogs of their historic counterparts to becoming nerfed & simplified versions that felt like a constricted mash-up of World-of-Warships-and-World-of-Planes.

On top of that, the entire odd-tiered portion of the CV tech-tree was removed.
No other ship type in the game has had such wholesale removal.  No other ship type has had a "re-work".

Recently, aerial AP bombs were globally nerfed.  What about the AP projectiles of all other ships?  Why not them, too, eh?
CV players who "got gud" enough to score hits and do damage and help keep their teammates afloat were *rewarded* by WOWs hobbling the CV's player's AP bomb capabilities.

There were (and still are) a number of people who posted on the forums to virulently oppose the existence of CV's in the game.  
I'm not one of them.

There have been a number of players I've encountered during battles who knew how to sail their ships to make best use of AA, maneuver to dodge torpedoes & bombs and minimize or fully dodge rocket attacks.
Some were during the RTS days and some have been during the CV "re-work" days. 
I figure some of them are the same people, but that's not the point.
The point is that there are people who put the effort in to learning how to adapt and thrive in a situation (that other people were just vocal and whining and complaining about).
Such good play makes for valued allies and worthy adversaries.  It enriches the game for everyone.

I've experienced a lot of strong & passionate feelings regarding my personal experiences while playing CV's in World of Warships.  I'm trying to remain civil and not get too worked-up, here in this topic.

I want CVs to remain in the game and I'd like to see their roles & capabilities expanded and improved.

I'd like additional ships & planes welcomed to the game, too.  
Playable cargo/repair ships.  Sea-plane tenders.  Submarines (currently a work-in-progress, but someday ...).  The hybrid ships, such as Ise and Tone.  Anti-submarine-warfare aircraft.
I'd like to see additional scenario operations to play them all in. 
I'd like to see players earn points during a battle by rescuing pilots whose planes have been shot-down (similar to how players can rescue the Captain of the Shchors in Operation - Aegis).  For that matter, rescuing crews of sinking ships could become an expanded role, too.  [Which makes me wonder if it is not done more often in order to keep the flow of play moving along and/or to adhere to guidelines that allow the game to be rated PG-13 or whatever.]

::: sigh ::: I guess that's enough, for now, eh?

[DrHolmes52]

8 hours ago, The_Big_Red_1 said:

WG should have said get gud instead of..."this".

WG is in the ship selling business, not the get gud business.

[LastRemnant]

RTS CV mode was stupidly hilariously OP and broken in the right hands  Because the CV player could spam carrier base aircraft on a ship wave after wave  Yet rework which allows you to control one a wave at a time is worse according to some people Whoever thinks this obviously has not been rekt by RTS CV before So yeah in terms sheer power and damage RTS CVs where far more dangerous than rework 

[The_Big_Red_1]

6 hours ago, LastRemnant said:

RTS CV mode was stupidly hilariously OP and broken in the right hands  Because the CV player could spam carrier base aircraft on a ship wave after wave  Yet rework which allows you to control one a wave at a time is worse according to some people Whoever thinks this obviously has not been rekt by RTS CV before So yeah in terms sheer power and damage RTS CVs where far more dangerous than rework 

which is why if they ever brought RTS back (they won't) they should put the damage values somewhere between RTS and Rework. RTS was as you say incredibly strong while Rework is abysmally weak. put it in the middle and you get the "sweet spot". 

[Laser_Beam]

CV rework.... same as getting the dent out of a car

 

 

[The_Big_Red_1]

4 hours ago, Laser_Beam said:

CV rework.... same as getting the dent out of a car

 

 

it ended up in failure...sigh what was WG thinking?

[Darkshadow86]

This change was for the better. The old cv was "Hold shift, click enemy; to aim manually or auto-aim my attack, that is the question." This new style is more engaging and less boring; besides, if people have an itch to macro a billion things, they can also play zerg on starcraft 2. 

 

This new change makes cv gameplay feel more interactive instead of looking at a map; that isn't to say that old RTS(real-time strategy) gameplay was terrible. It was just different from the new system that is implemented now. Who knows, the next cv could change the entire gameplay style once again.

 

People that stick to the old ways of doing things instead of learning new things will fail. It's like people who refuse to learn how to use a new coding program but are surprised when they are warned 2x then receive a pink slip.

[Darkshadow86]

On 9/14/2020 at 5:22 PM, BrushWolf said:

To the haters it was RTS because the skill floor was so high that few people played them beyond tier 6 making CV's so rare in tier 10 that AA builds were a waste.

I'm afraid I have to disagree. The RTS was extremely easy for those who have ten fingers to do multiple commands, no disrespect to any vets or civil workers that lost some digits. It was extremely new player friendly; you just had to remember how to play it. A good example is DCS; you have to remember so much stuff to even turn on the vehicle (not including the planes you can turn on with a couple of commands). But in WOWs, you don't need to remember all of that; instead, you must rely on muscle memory to function. I'd say the skill floor was plenty low.

But if you aren't too busy munching on popcorn(in reference to your gif), I wouldn't mind you justifying your opinion.

[BrushWolf]

6 minutes ago, Darkshadow86 said:

I'm afraid I have to disagree. The RTS was extremely easy for those who have ten fingers to do multiple commands, no disrespect to any vets or civil workers that lost some digits. It was extremely new player friendly; you just had to remember how to play it. A good example is DCS; you have to remember so much stuff to even turn on the vehicle (not including the planes you can turn on with a couple of commands). But in WOWs, you don't need to remember all of that; instead, you must rely on muscle memory to function. I'd say the skill floor was plenty low.

But if you aren't too busy munching on popcorn(in reference to your gif), I wouldn't mind you justifying your opinion.

Then why were they so rare in 8 - 10 that AA builds were only useful about 20% of the matches? They were only new player friendly if RTS games were something you liked which I will guess you do. For those that didn't like them they were not friendly in any way shape or form.

[The_Big_Red_1]

2 hours ago, Darkshadow86 said:

This change was for the better. The old cv was "Hold shift, click enemy; to aim manually or auto-aim my attack, that is the question." This new style is more engaging and less boring; besides, if people have an itch to macro a billion things, they can also play zerg on starcraft 2. 

 

This new change makes cv gameplay feel more interactive instead of looking at a map; that isn't to say that old RTS(real-time strategy) gameplay was terrible. It was just different from the new system that is implemented now. Who knows, the next cv could change the entire gameplay style once again.

 

People that stick to the old ways of doing things instead of learning new things will fail. It's like people who refuse to learn how to use a new coding program but are surprised when they are warned 2x then receive a pink slip.

it's only easy when the target is stationary but on the move...it's a lot harder to pull off even more difficult with the way AA works now. rework multiple attack passes looks cool on video but up close and personal it' a whole different story especially after attacking the target with the first wave you are move likely to lose even more planes before you have a chance to either get away or move to attack the next target.

[JamesZ28]

   I still say the rework was to make it compatible with consoles, all they had to do to fix the one sided cv matches where one cv player strafed the other out of existence, was remove strafe or nerf it some.