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

What we know so far about all the undocumented changes on CV gameplay

27 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

122
[386LV]
Members
81 posts
11,657 battles

The only good news here is that, with the latest game client, the replay of a CV game now shows aim reticle, although still often bugged.

 

And now comes the bad news. In case you don't know, the Chinese server of the game still runs at version 0.9.2, so someone was able to make a video to compare the differences. It turns out that in spite of the claim that the update does not affect gameplay, many aspects are nerfed, and the "bug" for which you lose more planes was not really a "bug", but merely a mistuning due to the change of the mechanism.

The video link is here: https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1Fk4y1C7ms and I will try to give a summary here:

  1. Planes now have greater turning radius (this is not tested in his video, so I can't say for sure that this is accurate), 
  2. When you start an attack while turning, the turning is no longer slowed (this is not a big deal to me tho)
  3. Once you release W key, speed is immediately lost, and the energe regeneration now has a small delay (we are now aware of this)
  4. The divebombers of Hakuryu and possibly other CVs now have a much farther aiming distance (2.0km vs 1.5km)
    HAKDB.thumb.PNG.57baaeeb80049866a8c3b75dbc333d6e.PNG
    We used to be able to rotate the reticle without "swing" it too much, but now it becomes impossible. This is also why many people say the feeling is different. Additionally, you can no longer adjust your aiming with W or S, so if you start an attack while pressing S, your entire attack can be accelerated little with W.
  5. Finally the plane returning issue: In the old version, it takes 3 seconds (2.5 seconds for British carpet bombers) for a plane to reach invulnerbility; now there is no longer a fixed time, but all planes must reach a certain height. Basically, the lower your attack goes, the longer you take AA damage before returning. The tests give the following result:
    • Hakuryu DBs dropping bombs when reaching highest --- immediately reach invulnerbility;
    • Other DBs dropping bombs when reaching highest --- 3 seconds
    • Attack planes shooting rockets and British carpet bombers --- 6 seconds
    • German rockets --- 7 seconds
    • Torpedo bombers --- 8 seconds

And not mentioned in the test video, but I believe you already noticed this: if a ship sits behind a small rock --- no matter how tiny it is, you cannot hit the ship with rocket planes: https://clips.twitch.tv/BlatantDependablePigeonNononoCat

TLDR; CVs are very bad now; Hakuryu is affected the most. Thanks WG. So much for the "unaffected gameplay".

  • Cool 12
  • Haha 2
  • Sad 1
  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,416
[CLUMP]
Members
1,614 posts
2,361 battles

Yeah the returning plane issue hasn't been fixed and I doubt it will be :Smile_sceptic: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
901
[HELLS]
Members
2,817 posts
31,030 battles

One thing you do not mention is the increase in arming distance for torpedoes. As far as I can tell, this is due to an torpedo speed increase as I saw no time increase for arming when dropping. This forces you to drop from farther out and increases your chances of missing the target. The extra distance gives smart ship drivers time to avoid being hit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,461
[S0L0]
[S0L0]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
4,862 posts
7,684 battles

New reticle was a very sneaky way to individually adjust various ordinance on CVs, while labeling it as a "Global Change"   I haven't played them all yet but at least looking at Enterprise and Kaga,  both were adjusted differently.    Enterprise got hit on DBs and rockets, with size and position of reticle and Kaga got it on arming distance of Torpedo bombers..       So I'm convinced all this deliberate and targeted.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,537
[WOLFG]
Members
32,804 posts
10,145 battles

I'll be honest, I've noticed nothing different, (other than cosmetic) other than torp drops with a fully closed reticle have pretty much zero spread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,117
[TARK]
Members
7,331 posts
3,112 battles

From the 0.9.9 patch notes:

We've changed the visual appearance of the aiming reticles for carrier squadrons, and also reworked the aircraft camera performance. This change will affect only the visual component of a squadron's interface, making it easier to aim with all types of armament without affecting gameplay.

 

Emphasis my own...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,117
[TARK]
Members
7,331 posts
3,112 battles
2 minutes ago, Skpstr said:

I'll be honest, I've noticed nothing different, (other than cosmetic) other than torp drops with a fully closed reticle have pretty much zero spread.

Plane turning is different.

Reticle locations are different.

Everything in the OP matches what I have observed in game.

WG has remained completely silent on the matter.

Multiple WG promises are being broken...

  • Cool 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,764
[RLGN]
Members
15,875 posts
27,649 battles
8 minutes ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

Multiple WG promises are being broken...

Gasp. Shock.

If carriers are fine as WG says, then why all of these ‘accidental’ changes that make them more difficult to use?

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,537
[WOLFG]
Members
32,804 posts
10,145 battles
8 minutes ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

Plane turning is different.

Reticle locations are different.

Not disagreeing, just saying I didn't notice.

It could be something to do with not having played CVs at all for a few weeks prior to the update, as the memory of the "old" planes wouldn't be fresh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,106
[FOXEH]
Banned
14,364 posts
20,708 battles
1 hour ago, _Thanagor_ said:

Thanks WG.

The only part of your post that was right!

  • Cool 3
  • Meh 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,981
[V_KNG]
Beta Testers
13,196 posts

Yea, things are different. Some CV's planes have a turning radius now that is well, abysmally large.

Torpedo drops - more than before - I can clearly see where the green means go drop line is before my target. Clearly the target will pass behind that line far enough the torpedo should detonate. It does not detonate, hence all the muscle memory has to be retrained. 

Older players notice things like that simply because we taught ourselves using the timing and other feedback from the game. 

As to the whole subject, in the end, it simply will not matter. They will do what they want to do, when they want to do it and nothing we can say or do will have any effect upon their choices. Oh, we'll be told otherwise of course, but it simply won't. 

I was pretty happy for them when they came out with the borked rework. You could see solid potential in the rework. They just tested without the appropriately skilled players OR ignored all the feedback they were provided. Either way, there was potential.

Now it has become just another mud bog, done up the way it's always been done, tweak, tweak, tweak, tweak until it breaks. 

Do they not understand their is a pretty good-sized crowd of people worldwide who will catch them every single time they ahem, "make a mistake"? Heck, the mistakes could be intended; what is caught gets walked back but not all the way. What doesn't get caught?

All the best to those fighting the good fight. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,981
[V_KNG]
Beta Testers
13,196 posts

So I thought I read something the devs said they fixed - you know, those weird dropping torpedoes and bombs. 

I must have misunderstood them. 

I was in the ELo, T6 carrier, flying lengthwise (bow to stern) on a cruiser. Perfectly aligned. Pickle the bombs. (Okay, drop the bombs). 

Right bomb spirals left, left bomb spirals right and both completely miss the ship. Completely. 

shaking_head_breaking_bad.gif

I'd still like an explanation for that complete [edited] of a drop. I brought this up a few weeks back but never got an explanation. Someone please tell me how an aircraft, flying in a straight line, manages to toss a bomb dropped from each wingtip completely across a ship to splash under the opposite wing tip. 

I don't care if you feel you have to make them miss WoWS, but at least do it with some decency, with some regards to the ahem, physical game world in which you model things. 

 

Edited by Herr_Reitz
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,416
[CLUMP]
Members
1,614 posts
2,361 battles
37 minutes ago, Herr_Reitz said:

So I thought I read something the devs said they fixed - you know, those weird dropping torpedoes and bombs. 

I must have misunderstood them. 

I was in the ELo, T6 carrier, flying lengthwise (bow to stern) on a cruiser. Perfectly aligned. Pickle the bombs. (Okay, drop the bombs). 

Right bomb spirals left, left bomb spirals right and both completely miss the ship. Completely. 

shaking_head_breaking_bad.gif

I'd still like an explanation for that complete [edited] of a drop. I brought this up a few weeks back but never got an explanation. Someone please tell me how an aircraft, flying in a straight line, manages to toss a bomb dropped from each wingtip completely across a ship to splash under the opposite wing tip. 

I don't care if you feel you have to make them miss WoWS, but at least do it with some decency, with some regards to the ahem, physical game world in which you model things. 

 

VSK0ZK0.gif

I think wargaming should let you customize planes loads out on a CV :fish_cute_2: Because DB planes suck no seriously you can have the perfect drop and bombs go everywhere but the target :fish_palm: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,981
[V_KNG]
Beta Testers
13,196 posts

Yea... then you look at FDR and think gee, what happens when more and more folks take her out to play in randoms... oops... big nerf inbound but wait... she's a steel ship... hmmm... 

How will they punish all carriers just to reel in FDR? Stay tuned folks, I'm sure it will be a real page turner. 

  • Cool 1
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,117
[TARK]
Members
7,331 posts
3,112 battles

I was having a nasty thought about the torpedo RNG patch notes...

...before, it NEVER happened that torpedoes would cross streams.

NOW, when watching the drop animation...it COULD happen regularly...

...so the patch notes talk about STOPPING that...which means that the 0.9.9 patch notes are not the patch notes from 0.9.8...but the patch notes from the ST work done...to nerf CVs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,284
[RKLES]
Members
964 posts
9 hours ago, Estimated_Prophet said:

Gasp. Shock.

If carriers are fine as WG says, then why all of these ‘accidental’ changes that make them more difficult to use?

The mass has spoken with their wallet,  just a thought.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,104
[5D]
Members
1,159 posts
15,400 battles

they say they fixed the issue but they dont , there many things that changed , CV dont play the same than they used MVR ap rocket  dont behave like they used to

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
908
[PIG]
[PIG]
Members
1,315 posts
6,739 battles
18 hours ago, _Thanagor_ said:

The only good news here is that, with the latest game client, the replay of a CV game now shows aim reticle, although still often bugged.

 

And now comes the bad news. In case you don't know, the Chinese server of the game still runs at version 0.9.2, so someone was able to make a video to compare the differences. It turns out that in spite of the claim that the update does not affect gameplay, many aspects are nerfed, and the "bug" for which you lose more planes was not really a "bug", but merely a mistuning due to the change of the mechanism.

The video link is here: https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1Fk4y1C7ms and I will try to give a summary here:

  1. Planes now have greater turning radius (this is not tested in his video, so I can't say for sure that this is accurate), 
  2. When you start an attack while turning, the turning is no longer slowed (this is not a big deal to me tho)
  3. Once you release W key, speed is immediately lost, and the energe regeneration now has a small delay (we are now aware of this)
  4. The divebombers of Hakuryu and possibly other CVs now have a much farther aiming distance (2.0km vs 1.5km)
    HAKDB.thumb.PNG.57baaeeb80049866a8c3b75dbc333d6e.PNG
    We used to be able to rotate the reticle without "swing" it too much, but now it becomes impossible. This is also why many people say the feeling is different. Additionally, you can no longer adjust your aiming with W or S, so if you start an attack while pressing S, your entire attack can be accelerated little with W.
  5. Finally the plane returning issue: In the old version, it takes 3 seconds (2.5 seconds for British carpet bombers) for a plane to reach invulnerbility; now there is no longer a fixed time, but all planes must reach a certain height. Basically, the lower your attack goes, the longer you take AA damage before returning. The tests give the following result:
    • Hakuryu DBs dropping bombs when reaching highest --- immediately reach invulnerbility;
    • Other DBs dropping bombs when reaching highest --- 3 seconds
    • Attack planes shooting rockets and British carpet bombers --- 6 seconds
    • German rockets --- 7 seconds
    • Torpedo bombers --- 8 seconds

And not mentioned in the test video, but I believe you already noticed this: if a ship sits behind a small rock --- no matter how tiny it is, you cannot hit the ship with rocket planes: https://clips.twitch.tv/BlatantDependablePigeonNononoCat

TLDR; CVs are very bad now; Hakuryu is affected the most. Thanks WG. So much for the "unaffected gameplay".

Lovely. Fact based post proving the War on Noobism is almost lost. @Umikami will be happy. Goltz.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,117
[TARK]
Members
7,331 posts
3,112 battles
8 hours ago, Learux said:

The mass has spoken with their wallet,  just a thought.

I dont think too many CV mains are complaining that the ship was nerfed...

...the complaining is the nontransparent way of doing it.

Had WG come out and said that they were going to change the way AA hit exiting planes...and some of the drop RNG...it would have been fine.

Doing it without telling anyone...while claiming they were not doing it...

THAT is the issue at hand.

41 minutes ago, Battleship_Constitution said:

Not caring about CV nerfs...bout Fing time they get nerfs rather than nerfing the AA across the board to make that class work.

Here is hoping in the future WG is TRANSPARENT about it rather than secretive.

Because the precedent set here...(premiums can be nerfed without global changes and without notice)...is different than what WG has promised in the past.

I am all for nerfing premiums. CVs have been overpowered and need adjustment. These things need to be done PUBLICLY, not secretly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
554 posts
17,557 battles

I am complaining about the nerfs.

Even if you assume CVs need some nerfs, tossing a whole pile of them in at once means you can’t tell how effective any single one is. And while I dislike the non-transparency, it seems like WG doesn’t even understand what all changed. I could take some transparency if they knew what the hell they were doing.

  • Cool 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,666
[YORHA]
Members
5,315 posts
10,506 battles
13 hours ago, Herr_Reitz said:

I'd still like an explanation for that complete [edited] of a drop. I brought this up a few weeks back but never got an explanation. Someone please tell me how an aircraft, flying in a straight line, manages to toss a bomb dropped from each wingtip completely across a ship to splash under the opposite wing tip. 

 

                                                                                                         yvAi9XA.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12
[TAXI]
Members
39 posts

So, in closing, all these changes that were stickied as being investigated, are they actually permanent?  From that sticky I was being led to believe they were unintended.  Is that no longer the case?  I mean, it's been how long since the patch and I can't find one post by an employee that says either:

1. Changes were actually intended, eat a fat rooster.

2. Changes were not intended and it will take a while to fix, expect fix in patch x.x.x.x. 

 

Not a good look.  Is there really no one in charge that can give a clear, concise answer?  

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×