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

One thing I find hilarious about CV rework.

39 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

2,012
Members
2,439 posts
5,404 battles

WG changed from RTS to what we have now, due to RTS being complexed and not “mainstream” for the common player. IE: to divided attention where you have to control and do multiple things at once.

BUT NOW looking at new sub test and everything implemented (having to looking at where sub is pinging your ship, controlling ASW planes, dodging torps, DDs doing everything imaginable etc..etc..) doesn’t that kid of contradict WGs idea of keeping it mainstream and not to complicated? It’s like we are moving from one simi complicated idea (RTS) to what they are implementing now...lol

i just find it very ironic. 

  • Cool 4
  • Thanks 2
  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
851
[NDA]
Supertester, In AlfaTesters
2,373 posts
12,800 battles

Agree, but they are still WiP

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
199
[ANKER]
Members
373 posts
6,417 battles
26 minutes ago, Legio_X_ said:

WG changed from RTS to what we have now, due to RTS being complexed and not “mainstream” for the common player. IE: to divided attention where you have to control and do multiple things at once.

BUT NOW looking at new sub test and everything implemented (having to looking at where sub is pinging your ship, controlling ASW planes, dodging torps, DDs doing everything imaginable etc..etc..) doesn’t that kid of contradict WGs idea of keeping it mainstream and not to complicated? It’s like we are moving from one simi complicated idea (RTS) to what they are implementing now...lol

i just find it very ironic. 

well said hahha

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
143
[FF]
Members
375 posts
15,116 battles
45 minutes ago, Legio_X_ said:

WG changed from RTS to what we have now, due to RTS being complexed and not “mainstream” for the common player. IE: to divided attention where you have to control and do multiple things at once.

 

keeping CV "mainstream" and accessible  could mean a lot of things and not just simplifying gameplay and limiting multitasking

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
532
[WOLFG]
Members
964 posts
6 minutes ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

Write it up and send feedback to WG in the testing system...

I hope you were being facetious. because I can't believe anybody would think WG gives one fat crap about what the players think.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,103
[FOXEH]
Banned
14,364 posts
20,009 battles
1 hour ago, Fodder4U said:

Agree, but they are still WiP

This has been going on for, what .... a year now? This isn't a Work In Progress; it's a CAREER IN PROGRESS!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,110
[TARK]
Members
7,331 posts
2,762 battles
47 minutes ago, Captain_Rawhide said:

I hope you were being facetious. because I can't believe anybody would think WG gives one fat crap about what the players think.

At least you told them. Then, when they try to blame you (like for 0.8.0, for example)...you can refute the lie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,769
[SALVO]
Members
25,498 posts
27,483 battles
3 hours ago, 9TenSix2Eight said:

well said hahha

No, not really.  I mean, what the heck does "RTS being complexed" even mean?  That doesn't look like something "well said" to me.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,012
Members
2,439 posts
5,404 battles
8 minutes ago, Crucis said:

No, not really.  I mean, what the heck does "RTS being complexed" even mean?  That doesn't look like something "well said" to me.

 

 

RTS like all RTS games are complexed around managing multiple units at the same time. People who can’t do this get “overwhelmed” and lose. 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,769
[SALVO]
Members
25,498 posts
27,483 battles
4 minutes ago, Legio_X_ said:

RTS like all RTS games are complexed around managing multiple units at the same time. People who can’t do this get “overwhelmed” and lose. 

That's called multi-tasking, not being "complexed".

  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,246
[SALVO]
Members
5,323 posts
4,560 battles
16 minutes ago, Crucis said:

That's called multi-tasking, not being "complexed".

KMECYNf.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
848
[WOOKY]
Beta Testers
1,743 posts
4 hours ago, Legio_X_ said:

WG changed from RTS to what we have now, due to RTS being complexed and not “mainstream” for the common player. IE: to divided attention where you have to control and do multiple things at once.

BUT NOW looking at new sub test and everything implemented (having to looking at where sub is pinging your ship, controlling ASW planes, dodging torps, DDs doing everything imaginable etc..etc..) doesn’t that kid of contradict WGs idea of keeping it mainstream and not to complicated? It’s like we are moving from one simi complicated idea (RTS) to what they are implementing now...lol

i just find it very ironic. 

hmmmm.... youre not exactly wrong per say, but I dont find what you mention to be particularly complex. seeing a sub ping and sending an asw plane over while firing on another ship is no harder than clicking on manual secondaries on one ship while firing main guns on another.

This may be why I liked RTS CVs and am not fond of playing arcade CVs... I like lots of things happening simultaneously.

The irony is noted and not contested.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,905
[WOLFG]
Members
30,734 posts
9,354 battles
11 hours ago, Umikami said:

This has been going on for, what .... a year now? This isn't a Work In Progress; it's a CAREER IN PROGRESS!

I dunno how long they worked on the CV rework, but they caught hell from us for rushing it. Them taking long with the subs means they actually listened.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,475
[WPORT]
Members
6,673 posts
11,674 battles
24 minutes ago, Skpstr said:

I dunno how long they worked on the CV rework, but they caught hell from us for rushing it. Them taking long with the subs means they actually listened.

+1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,268
[CMFRT]
[CMFRT]
Members
16,514 posts
On 10/24/2020 at 8:31 AM, Legio_X_ said:

WG changed from RTS to what we have now, due to RTS being complexed and not “mainstream” for the common player. IE: to divided attention where you have to control and do multiple things at once.

BUT NOW looking at new sub test and everything implemented (having to looking at where sub is pinging your ship, controlling ASW planes, dodging torps, DDs doing everything imaginable etc..etc..) doesn’t that kid of contradict WGs idea of keeping it mainstream and not to complicated? It’s like we are moving from one simi complicated idea (RTS) to what they are implementing now...lol

i just find it very ironic. 

"But too complicated" was always just a convenient excuse, with a side of insulting the playerbase.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,836
[SIDE]
Members
4,939 posts
2 hours ago, KilljoyCutter said:

"But too complicated" was always just a convenient excuse, with a side of insulting the playerbase.

 

They were complicated, not intuitive and not immersive. Now they are much simpler, more intuitive and somewhat immersive. No they aren't realistic. No they don't have perfect air surface interactions yet.

It's a darn sight more fun for people I know to jump in a carrier (when we want to try something a little different) now than it ever was. This seems to be backed up by increasing popularity of the type. People like playing them more now than RTS. Most of them suck but they aren't here for the first place trophy anyway. I seriously doubt many folks are insulted by reasons given for RTS.

The more I reflect on the rework the more I appreciate the new product, despite a few lingering problems,  and the direction it's taken the game.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,268
[CMFRT]
[CMFRT]
Members
16,514 posts
11 minutes ago, thebigblue said:

They were complicated, not intuitive and not immersive. Now they are much simpler, more intuitive and somewhat immersive. No they aren't realistic. No they don't have perfect air surface interactions yet.

It's a darn sight more fun for people I know to jump in a carrier (when we want to try something a little different) now than it ever was. This seems to be backed up by increasing popularity of the type. People like playing them more now than RTS. Most of them suck but they aren't here for the first place trophy anyway. I seriously doubt many folks are insulted by reasons given for RTS.

The more I reflect on the rework the more I appreciate the new product, despite a few lingering problems,  and the direction it's taken the game.

I found the old RTS-like interface FAR more intuitive, and IMO there's nothing immersive about aircraft that only move in two dimensions and have to go through convoluted mini-game "aiming" processes. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,103
[FOXEH]
Banned
14,364 posts
20,009 battles
4 hours ago, Skpstr said:

Them taking long with the subs means they actually listened.

Them taking long with subs means they're trying to do the impossible .... twice, after having failed the first time.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,012
Members
2,439 posts
5,404 battles

WG is gonna run out of ideas on ships soon and what will they do then? Go the [edited] route and introduce modern ships?

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
66
[BERYL]
[BERYL]
Members
134 posts
5,058 battles
On 10/24/2020 at 11:14 AM, Legio_X_ said:

RTS like all RTS games are complexed around managing multiple units at the same time. People who can’t do this get “overwhelmed” and lose. 

WG wanted carriers to appeal to the crowd who has problems with walking and chewing gum at the same time. Catering to the lowest common denominator. 

  • Cool 3
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,836
[SIDE]
Members
4,939 posts
4 hours ago, KilljoyCutter said:

I found the old RTS-like interface FAR more intuitive, and IMO there's nothing immersive about aircraft that only move in two dimensions and have to go through convoluted mini-game "aiming" processes. 

I can see that. It's gives it a shooter feel rather than a project management feel. In my opinion that makes it more immersive. For you, may e the management aspects are what made it more immersive. Aircraft dont fly backwards so missing the their dimension isn't that big a deal to me. Throw in some barrel rolls or air show stalls and I'd  be really happy though!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,836
[SIDE]
Members
4,939 posts
2 hours ago, RicketyEdge said:

WG wanted carriers to appeal to the crowd who has problems with walking and chewing gum at the same time. Catering to the lowest common denominator. 

Sorry man but you think too highly of the othe ship types. Playing a surface ship isn't the same thing as splitting atoms either. WASD and left mouse button are the exact same controls. The lowest common denominator seems to be the back line battleships sniping 20km away or the DD drivers that die on 3 min or less EVERY SINGLE GAME. 

Edited by thebigblue
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×