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

So it’s been a month now...

24 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

3,886
[WOLF1]
Beta Testers
13,272 posts
18,878 battles

I must have missed that memo. What "Dozen" are you referring to?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
699 posts
18,144 battles
2 minutes ago, paradat said:

I must have missed that memo. What "Dozen" are you referring to?


(note that there's additional issues lower in the thread beyond the ones listed in Mademoisail's first post)

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,108
[PVE]
Members
7,595 posts

Read the patch notes.  Sadly, WG said they undid the some changes to CVs.  For example, they "fixed" the increased time for planes to reach the immunity altitude after a strike.  Too bad.  Many of these changes were needed. 

  • Cool 2
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
332
[SNGNS]
Members
611 posts
7,050 battles

Fixed an issue that caused German aircraft to slow down for too long when Engine Boost was used, and also to return to their cruising speed too quickly.

Fixed an issue that caused aircraft to take too much time to gain the required altitude to return to the aircraft carrier, due to which they received too much damage.

Fixed an issue that caused rockets and bombs to miss the reticle when an attack was carried out during the course of gaining altitude.

from the patch notes. you mean these @Telastyn?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
699 posts
18,144 battles
45 minutes ago, Slimeball91 said:

Read the patch notes.  Sadly, WG said they undid the some changes to CVs.  For example, they "fixed" the increased time for planes to reach the immunity altitude after a strike.  Too bad.  Many of these changes were needed. 

I read the patch notes.

A bandaid over one of the issues is... unsatisfying. Even a "we're working on A,B,C. D,E,F are going to stay." would be welcome. Because right now, it just seems like WG doesn't know what they're doing.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
699 posts
18,144 battles
1 minute ago, TobTorp said:

Fixed an issue that caused German aircraft to slow down for too long when Engine Boost was used, and also to return to their cruising speed too quickly.

Fixed an issue that caused aircraft to take too much time to gain the required altitude to return to the aircraft carrier, due to which they received too much damage.

Fixed an issue that caused rockets and bombs to miss the reticle when an attack was carried out during the course of gaining altitude.

from the patch notes. you mean these @Telastyn?

The second is a fix. The other two are honestly things that people didn't even notice.

Big things that remain are torpedo and bomb dispersion, torp arming times versus the reticle, additional damage taken during attack runs (in addition to the after attack run damage that the patch notes might address), changed rocket angle of attack....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,761
[S0L0]
[S0L0]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
5,273 posts
8,381 battles

 

1 hour ago, Slimeball91 said:

Read the patch notes.  Sadly, WG said they undid the some changes to CVs.  For example, they "fixed" the increased time for planes to reach the immunity altitude after a strike.  Too bad.  Many of these changes were needed. 

    FTR... Wasn't the hot patch we got earlier supposed to have already "fixed" the exact same problem?... (which it did adjust lower -  but not fix)  The whole thing felt more like minor adjustments... not a fix?      And that problem, which is only one of several random nerfs unexpected bugs that occurred with CVs last patch...    I'm more concerned with the lack of transparency here than the changes... which I would have been fine with if they had announced as balancing?  There were several cooked in changes to the new reticles that adjusted many ships differently.. including some premiums.   If this can be done with CVs... it can happen to any ship type in the game...     

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,349
[SALVO]
Members
9,549 posts
6,988 battles
1 hour ago, Telastyn said:

WG, when are you going to fix the dozen “unintended changes” introduced in 0.9.9?

An "unintended change" is not the same as a problem, it might not need to be fixed...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
699 posts
18,144 battles
Just now, ArIskandir said:

An "unintended change" is not the same as a problem, it might not need to be fixed...

Absolutely. The answer might be "never". 

Then we can talk about balancing the new normal (where appropriate).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,349
[SALVO]
Members
9,549 posts
6,988 battles
1 minute ago, Telastyn said:

Then we can talk about balancing the new normal (where appropriate).

Oh, they just said they were happy with how things are working now... I guess (according to them) when people on both sides of the fence are unhappy, you can call it balanced

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,886
[WOLF1]
Beta Testers
13,272 posts
18,878 battles
52 minutes ago, HamAndCheez said:

THE DIRTY DOZEN | Cleveland Institute of Art College of Art | 800.223.4700

LOL ... Oh those guys OK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,313
[-BUI-]
Members
2,708 posts
7,103 battles
1 hour ago, Telastyn said:

WG, when are you going to fix the dozen “unintended changes” introduced in 0.9.9?

Pretty sure they were never unintended in the first place, if anything, they were accidentally put into the game before they were ready to do it, hence why it was unannounced, someone goofed and left test code in the final release and rather than admit that, they "fix" some of them and leave the rest they intended to eventually release, stay.

RNG Torps may have finally been the needle that broke my back.    Making a perfect torp drop on a clueless target and have my 1 of my 3 torps go WAY left and the other 2 go WAY right with a battleship of space between them is stupid, why am I punished for lining up a perfect attack run?    I'm so tired of this class getting nerfed patch after patch after patch because so many terrible players exist that cannot use their brains to figure out basic gameplay mechanics.      But whatever I guess, I can simply go back to DD and spam torpedoes and never be seen except for a few seconds at max radar range and score 150,000 damage games against helpless targets that LITERALLY have no way to fight back, not just the made up and totally false "no counterplay against planes" argument thats repeated ad nauseam.

  • Cool 2
  • Thanks 2
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,119
[TARK]
Members
7,331 posts
3,412 battles
2 hours ago, Telastyn said:

WG, when are you going to fix the dozen “unintended changes” introduced in 0.9.9?

Every patch, probably.

1 hour ago, Slimeball91 said:

Read the patch notes.  Sadly, WG said they undid the some changes to CVs.  For example, they "fixed" the increased time for planes to reach the immunity altitude after a strike.  Too bad.  Many of these changes were needed. 

Note how these 'fixes' do not claim to return to the previous state...nor do they quantify ANY of the changes...so we have no easy way to verify impact on gameplay.

14 minutes ago, ArIskandir said:

An "unintended change" is not the same as a problem, it might not need to be fixed...

An unintended change that individually nerfed / buffed premium ships...that WG refuses to document in any way...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,031
[WOLFG]
Members
34,398 posts
10,713 battles
7 hours ago, HamAndCheez said:

THE DIRTY DOZEN | Cleveland Institute of Art College of Art | 800.223.4700

If only the guy to the left of Cassavetes had a hammer.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,031
[WOLFG]
Members
34,398 posts
10,713 battles

As an aside, did they fix that "bug" with EM?

I took Musashi out today, and literally wanted to rip my hair out. Thunderstorm Front map, and targets kept disappearing before I could get my guns into the same zip code.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,119
[TARK]
Members
7,331 posts
3,412 battles
22 minutes ago, Skpstr said:

As an aside, did they fix that "bug" with EM?

I took Musashi out today, and literally wanted to rip my hair out. Thunderstorm Front map, and targets kept disappearing before I could get my guns into the same zip code.....

Yes they did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33
[FNGSX]
Members
104 posts
6,574 battles

I dont know man, shadow nerfs are some of the scummiest moves anyone can pull even if its "unintended changes". Why not simply say its a nerf/change we implemented last minute instead of denying it was a shadow nerf for the torpedo n bomb planes and the altitude damages - extra plane damage.

What ever happened to the planned AA range changes that you were gonna implement ? extending the ranges with only warning flak shots and lowering air detect ability of surface ships by air and the slow ramp up of the AA if the guns were turned on or off. Instead some of the already mentioned "unintended (shadow) changes" are just [edited], id be more okay with it being mentioned prior but just acting stupid and dumb over it is not what im here for, zero respect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
3,497 posts
6,969 battles
7 hours ago, Zenn3k said:

RNG Torps may have finally been the needle that broke my back.    Making a perfect torp drop on a clueless target and have my 1 of my 3 torps go WAY left and the other 2 go WAY right with a battleship of space between them is stupid, why am I punished for lining up a perfect attack run?    

Back at release, you lined up a perfect cruiser broadside and that sucker was going down!  Over the years, that sort of thing has become entirely RNG dependent (and much more rare).  

Sounds like they have fast forwarded the CV hidden "dispersion" mechanic up to the potato levels that all the rest of us have to deal with.  

Edited by CommodoreKang

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
682
[NSEW]
Members
2,586 posts
12,112 battles

I have been on the receiving end of the "RNG torps" from a russian DD.  It was truly an odd spread.

First torp (A) going off on a "regular path", What seemed to be the second torp (B) crisscrossed  itself with the third (C) torp.   Essentially, two torps hitting me right on its crossed path.  Instead of missing me had it not.  Wished I'd uploaded that game play to some video sharing forum.  I can't recall which game it was.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
699 posts
18,144 battles

Took out my GZ today to see how bad things still are.

Deplaned in 7 minutes from attacking a Tirpitz, Monarch, and Kitakaze - despite dodging flak, early dropping DBs, and generally being one of the best GZ drivers in NA.

What a joke.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×